Flying Under the Radar: Wildlife Trafficking in the Air Transport sector

Flying Under the Radar

Wildlife Trafficking in the Air Transport Sector

Mary Utermohlen & Patrick Baine

Flying Under the Radar

The USAID Reducing Opportunities for Unlawful Transport of Endangered Species (ROUTES) Partnership brings

together government agencies, transportation and logistics industry companies and representatives, international

conservation, development and law enforcement organizations and donors in order to disrupt wildlife trafficking activities,

and forms a key element of the concerted international response to addressing wildlife poaching and associated criminal

activities worldwide.

At the heart of ROUTES is a core group of partners collaborating with the U.S. Government and the transport sector

that includes the Center for Advanced Defense Studies (C4ADS), Freeland, the International Air Transport Association

(IATA), TRAFFIC, and WWF. The Partnership is funded by USAID and coordinated by TRAFFIC.

For more information on the ROUTES Partnership visit www.routespartnership.org.

Flying Under the Radar

ABOUT C4ADS

C4ADS (www.c4ads.org) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit

organization dedicated to data-driven analysis and

evidence-based reporting of conflict and security

issues worldwide. We seek to alleviate the analytical

burden carried by public sector institutions by

applying manpower, depth, and rigor to questions of

conflict and security.

Our approach leverages nontraditional investigative

techniques and emerging analytical technologies.

We recognize the value of working on the ground in

the field, capturing local knowledge, and collecting

original data to inform our analysis. At the same

time, we employ cutting edge technology to manage

and analyze that data. The result is an innovative

analytical approach to conflict prevention and

mitigation.

ABOUT ROUTES AND Flying Under the Radar

Under the ROUTES Partnership, C4ADS aims

to identify and track wildlife trafficking trends

and modus operandi, as well as assess the effects

of ROUTES’ efforts. In Year 1, the Partners have

focused on trafficking through the air transit

sector, and thus this report examines the trends,

transit routes, and modus operandi used by wildlife

smugglers exploiting the aviation industry. To ensure

the relevance of our analysis to the current state of

wildlife trafficking and guarantee a timely delivery

of our results prior to Year 2, C4ADS has focused

initially on trafficking of ivory, rhino horn, reptiles,

and birds by air from 2009 to August 2016. Future

ROUTES reports will examine a broader scope of

wildlife trafficking activity. This report will establish

a baseline for continued analyses in Years 2 through

5 of the ROUTES project.

LEGAL DISCLAIMER

The mention of any individual, company,

organization, or other entity in this report does

not imply the violation of any law or international

agreement, and should not be construed as such.

This report is made possible by the generous support

of the American People through the United States

Agency for International Development (USAID).

The contents are the responsibility of C4ADS and

do not necessarily reflect the views of the ROUTES

Partners, USAID or the United States Government.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Mary Utermohlen received degrees in International

Relations and Accounting from the College of

William & Mary, with concentrations in Hispanic

Studies and Economics. Mary has studied in Spain

and in the UK, speaks Spanish and is learning

Portuguese. She writes for the Diplomatic Courier,

and has written for the US Army’s Training Brain

Operations Center. Mary manages the C4ADS

Environmental Crimes Fusion Cell’s timber and

IUU fishing portfolios.

Patrick Baine received his undergraduate degree

in Political Science and Chinese Language from

Appalachian State University. He then lived,

worked, and studied in China for five years, which

included a one-year Master’s Certificate program at

the Hopkins-Nanjing Center. Patrick received his

Master’s in International Relations and International

Economics from The Johns Hopkins School of

Advanced International Studies with a specialization

in Quantitative Methods and Economic Theory. His

research at C4ADS concentrates on international

wildlife trafficking with a focus on Asia.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank the team of people

who assisted with the data collection, analysis, and

editing expertise needed for this report: Spike Nowak,

for his help with R; Ethan Krauss, for his substantial

help in the earliest phase of data collection; Allie Van

Vliet and Elina Saxena for their data collection and

structuring efforts; and finally Evangeline Hines, for

her technological, formatting, and editing prowess.

This report could not have been written without

them.

The authors would also like to thank the World

Customs Organization (WCO), International Air

Transport Association (IATA), the US Fish &

Wildlife Service (FWS), US Department of Homeland

Security Immigration and Customs Enforcement,

TRAFFIC, Nitin Sekar, and Fiona Underwood for

their help in reviewing the report.

Flying Under the Radar

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................. 9

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 10

Air TrAnsporT secTor �� 10

convergence wiTh criminAl neTworks �� 11

heAlTh risks �� 12

wildlife TrAfficking & seizure dATA �� 12

METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................ 14

The dATA �� 14

Figure 1. Number of air seizures contained within the C4ADS Air Seizure Database by category

............................................................................................................................................. 14

Figure 2. Data availability for each seizure within the C4ADS Air Seizure Database ......... 15

dATA gAps & BiAses �� 16

TRENDS AND TOTALS ..................................................................................................................17

Figure 3. Global heat map for all trafficking instances in the air transport sector between

January 2009 and August 2016

.......................................................................................... 17

Figure 4. Seizure count timeline by category between January 2009 and August 2016 ........ 18

Table 1. Top ten countries by number of trafficking instances between January 2009 and

August 2016

.........................................................................................................................18

Figure 5. Number of seizures by country for those countries with more than 10 seizures between

January 2009 and August 2016

..........................................................................................19

counTry enforcemenT index �� 20

Figure 6. Country Enforcement Index for countries with twenty or more trafficking instances

between January 2009 and August 2016

.............................................................................20

TRENDS AND TOTALS – IVORY ................................................................................................. 22

Figure 7. Timeline of ivory seizures made in airports between January 2009 and August 2016

............................................................................................................................................. 22

Figure 8. Weight of ivory seized (kg) per year between January 2009 and August 2016 ....... 22

Figure 9. Average weight of ivory seized (kg) per year between January 2009 and August 2016

............................................................................................................................................. 22

Figure 10. Global heat map for ivory trafficking instances in the air transport sector between

January 2009 and August 2016

..........................................................................................23

Flying Under the Radar

Table 2. Top ten countries by number of ivory trafficking instances between January 2009 and

August 2016

.........................................................................................................................23

pArisiAn AnTiques And excess luggAge �� 24

TRENDS AND TOTALS – RHINO HORN ................................................................................... 25

Figure 11. Timeline of rhino horn seizures made in airports between January 2009 and August

2016

..................................................................................................................................... 25

Figure 12. Weight of rhino horn seized (kg) per year between January 2009 and August 2016

.............................................................................................................................................25

Figure 13. Average weight of rhino horn seized (kg) per year between January 2009 and August

2016

..................................................................................................................................... 25

Figure 14. Global heat map for rhino horn trafficking instances in the air transport sector

between January 2009 and August 2016

.............................................................................26

Table 3. Top ten countries by number of rhino horn trafficking instances between January 2009

and August 2016

................................................................................................................. 26

TRENDS AND TOTALS – REPTILES ........................................................................................... 27

Figure 15. Timeline of reptile seizures made in airports between January 2009 and August

2016

..................................................................................................................................... 27

Figure 16. Number of reptiles seized per year between January 2009 and August 2016 ....... 27

Figure 17. Average number of reptiles per seizure between January 2009 and August 2016 . 27

Figure 18. Global heat map for reptile trafficking instances in the air transport sector between

January 2009 and August 2016

..........................................................................................28

Table 4. Top ten countries by number of reptile trafficking instances between January 2009 and

August 2016

.........................................................................................................................28

TRENDS AND TOTALS – BIRDS.................................................................................................. 29

Figure 19. Timeline of bird seizures made in airports between January 2009 and August 2016

............................................................................................................................................. 29

Figure 20. Number of birds seized per year between January 2009 and August 2016 .......... 29

Figure 21. Average number of birds seized per year between January 2009 and August 2016

............................................................................................................................................. 29

Figure 22. Global heat map for reptile trafficking instances in the air transport sector between

January 2009 and August 2016

..........................................................................................30

Table 5. Top ten countries by number of bird trafficking instances between January 2009 and

August 2016

.........................................................................................................................30

hAir curlers from guyAnA �� 31

AIRPORTS AND ROUTES ............................................................................................................. 33

Flying Under the Radar

Figure 23. All trafficking routes by air recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database ......... 33

Figure 24. Country level flight route information for countries with five or more trafficking

instances between January 2009 and August 2016

.............................................................34

Figure 25. Airport seizure count by category for airports with five or more seizures between

January 2009 and August 2016

..........................................................................................36

AIRPORTS AND ROUTES – IVORY ............................................................................................. 37

Figure 26. Ivory trafficking routes by air recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database ...... 37

Figure 27. Country level flight route information for countries with six or more ivory trafficking

instances between January 2009 and August 2016

.............................................................38

Figure 28. Airport seizure count for airports with four or more ivory seizures between January

2009 and August 2016

........................................................................................................38

repeATing rouTes �� 39

AIRPORTS AND ROUTES – RHINO HORN .............................................................................. 40

Figure 29. Rhino horn trafficking routes by air recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database

.............................................................................................................................................40

Figure 30. Country level flight route information for countries with three or more rhino horn

trafficking instances between January 2009 and August 2016

............................................ 41

Figure 31. Airport seizure count for airports with three or more rhino horn seizures between

January 2009 and August 2016

.......................................................................................... 41

AIRPORTS AND ROUTES – REPTILES ....................................................................................... 42

Figure 32. Reptile trafficking routes by air recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database ... 42

Figure 33. Country level flight route information for countries with six or more reptile trafficking

instances between January 2009 and August 2016

............................................................. 43

Figure 34. Airport seizure count for airports with three or more reptile seizures between January

2009 and August 2016

........................................................................................................43

shifTing TrAnsiT rouTes, nArcoTics, And repTiles �� 45

AIRPORTS AND ROUTES – BIRDS .............................................................................................46

Figure 35. Bird trafficking routes by air recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database ........46

Figure 36. Country level flight route information for countries with four or more bird trafficking

instances between January 2009 and August 2016

............................................................. 47

Figure 37. Airport seizure count for airports with three or more bird seizures between January

2009 and August 2016

........................................................................................................ 47

MODUS OPERANDI ....................................................................................................................... 49

Figure 38. Methods of transport for all trafficking instances in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database

Flying Under the Radar

between January 2009 and August 2016 .............................................................................49

common modus operAndi �� 50

MODUS OPERANDI – IVORY ....................................................................................................... 54

Figure 39. Methods of transport for ivory trafficking instances by air between January 2009

and August 2016

................................................................................................................. 54

hAndmAde vesTs in hong kong �� 56

frAudulenT documenTATion �� 57

MODUS OPERANDI – RHINO HORN ........................................................................................ 58

Figure 40. Methods of transport for rhino horn trafficking instances by air between January

2009 and August 2016

........................................................................................................58

indirecT TrAnsiT rouTe And ‘losT’ luggAge ��60

souTh AfricAn TAxidermy ��60

MODUS OPERANDI – REPTILES ................................................................................................. 61

Figure 41. Methods of transport for reptile trafficking instances by air between January 2009

and August 2016

................................................................................................................. 61

repeAT offenders �� 64

lizArds & germAny �� 65

MODUS OPERANDI — BIRDS ....................................................................................................... 67

Figure 42. Methods of transport for bird trafficking instances by air between January 2009 and

August 2016

.........................................................................................................................67

The h5n1 virus �� 69

cusTom-mAde cloThing �� 70

CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................... 71

RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................................. 74

APPENDIX I – SEIZURE DATA BIASES & VULNERABILITIES ............................................... 80

APPENDIX II – R PACKAGES ....................................................................................................... 85

APPENDIX III – TRAFFICKING HEAT MAPS ............................................................................86

APPENDIX IV – COUNTRY ENFORCEMENT INDEX .............................................................. 89

Figure 43. Country Enforcement Index for countries with five or more trafficking instances 89

Flying Under the Radar

APPENDIX V – TRAFFICKING ROUTES MAPS ........................................................................ 91

APPENDIX VI – HUMAN TRAFFICKING ASSESSMENT TOOL FOR AIRLINES & AIRPORTS

............................................................................................................................................................94

APPENDIX VII – SEIZURE REPORTING ..................................................................................... 95

END NOTES .....................................................................................................................................96

Flying Under the Radar

Executive Summary

Environmental crime is estimated to be worth between $91 and 258 billion, with wildlife crime making

up $7 to 23 billion of the total,

and is currently estimated to be growing at two to three times the speed of

the global economy.

Over the past few years, myriad studies and reports have examined the economic and

environmental devastation wreaked by wildlife crime, as well as its intertwining links to transnational criminal

networks.

iii iv

Few studies, however, have focused on the transport systems used by wildlife traffickers, despite

the large benefits that traffickers have gained from the increasing interconnectedness of global infrastructure

and transport systems. Flying Under the Radar examines wildlife trafficking through the air transport sector,

and is designed to support law enforcement and the private sector’s efforts to stem the hidden flow of illegal

wildlife through their jurisdictions and supply chains.

Given the covert nature of illegal activity, wildlife traffickers’ past, current, and potential future moves must

be assessed by obtaining and analyzing detailed wildlife seizure data. Where this data exists, however, it

exists largely in partial and incomplete form, or held disparately and privately by various intergovernmental

organizations and enforcement agencies. To mitigate this challenge, C4ADS’ analysts spent three months

building a baseline of information by collecting and structuring open source seizure data for four categories

of wildlife and wildlife products (ivory, rhino horn, live reptiles, and live birds). These categories were

specifically chosen based on data availability and trafficking frequency, and collectively account for about

66% of trafficked wildlife products, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).

C4ADS’ analysts collected the majority of this data from country reporting and news media, as most seizure

databases do not provide the requisite detail for inclusion in an assessment of air trafficking.

The use of seizure data, while currently the best method available for investigating trafficking activity of

all types, can lead to a variety of mistaken conclusions. For instance, better public seizure reporting may

create the appearance of a trafficking problem where none exists. Still, seizure data, taken together with the

appropriate caveats, provides a good picture of overall trafficking activity, and can be used to direct future

anti-trafficking efforts.

Wildlife trafficking is a global problem that takes advantage of enforcement loopholes, lack of awareness,

limited public and private sector coordination, capacity gaps, and lagging technology and procedures to move

illicit products through the licit transportation system. As international travel continues to exponentially

increase, particularly in the air transport sector, enforcement and the private sector should make immediate

changes to better stem the international flow of illicit wildlife. Without such changes, wildlife traffickers

will continue to find the illegal wildlife trade a profitable, comparatively easy and low-risk enterprise, at

substantial detriment to ecosystems, economies, and global security.

Flying Under the Radar is divided into three main sections:

• Trends and Totals examines the overall conclusions that can be drawn from the seizure data contained

within the C4ADS Air Seizure Database, such as the changes in seizure sizes over time, a Country

Enforcement Index for countries involved in twenty or more trafficking instances, and an analysis of

the number of trafficking instances per country.

• Airports and Routes maps out the international and domestic transit routes that appear in our data,

evaluates countries’ roles in different illicit wildlife supply chains, and assesses airport seizure

numbers.

• Modus Operandi details the common methods used by traffickers, as well as methods that seem to be

specific to one category of wildlife and wildlife products.

Flying Under the Radar

Introduction

Wildlife trafficking is one of the most prominent forms of international organized crime in the world,

ranking just behind drugs, human, and arms trafficking in estimated annual value.

The illegal wildlife trade

is driven by both legal and illegal demand for wildlife products. A 2016 UNODC report found that traffickers

that launder their illicit goods through legal commercial systems have access to substantially larger demand

markets than those relying on the black market alone.

vii

The size of the legal wildlife trade can therefore give

some indication of the growth of illegal wildlife trafficking; according to one estimate, the legal trade in

wildlife products grew from around $60 billion in the 1990s to over $323 billion in 2009, a 438% increase.

viii

Demand for a number of protected species and illicit wildlife products have experienced a similar upswing;

ivory trafficking in particular has undergone a well-documented rise. A 2013 study by Fiona Underwood,

Robert Burn, and Tom Milliken found that ivory trafficking was “rapidly increasing and at its highest level

for 16 years, more than doubling from 2007 to 2011 and tripling from 1998 to 2011.”

Another Underwood,

Burn, and Milliken report from September 2016 found that ivory trafficking activity, as measured by seizure

weights, continued to increase through 2015, appearing to almost triple between 2007 and 2015.

The

recently completed Great Elephant Census, a series of country surveys on the number and distribution of

remaining African elephant populations, found that overall, “Savanna elephant populations declined by 30

percent (equal to 144,000 elephants) between 2007 and 2014.”

The Census stated that “devastatingly low

numbers of elephants were found in northeastern Democratic Republic of Congo, northern Cameroon and

southwest Zambia,” so low, in fact, that researchers believe those populations currently face extinction.

xii

Other countries, such as Tanzania and Mozambique, lost substantial numbers of elephants – Tanzania alone

lost as much as 60% of its elephant population, down from 109,051 in 2009 to 43,330 in 2014.

xiii

Less well-documented, but just as urgent, trafficking of other wildlife species seems to have mirrored the surge

in ivory trafficking. Rhino horns, for instance, frequently move along the same routes as ivory due to the animals’

overlapping habitats and their associated demand countries (primarily China, Vietnam, and Thailand).

xiv

As a result, rhinos are frequently targeted by the same or connected trafficking networks, and have experienced

catastrophic declines of their own within a similar timeframe. According to Save the Rhino, “By the end of

2015, the number of African rhinos killed by poachers had increased for the sixth year in a row with at least

1,338 rhinos killed by poachers across Africa…”

The number of rhinos poached within South Africa alone

exploded from 13 in 2007 to 1,215 in 2014.

xvi

In addition to the current plight of elephants and rhinos, many other species are suffering, and, in some cases,

have been pushed to the brink of extinction due to pressure from the illegal trade in wildlife and wildlife products.

For example, the helmeted hornbill was up-listed from Near Threatened to Critically Endangered in 2015, in

large part due to “intense hunting pressure” by traffickers interested in profiting off the hornbill’s casque.

xvii

The population of the ploughshare tortoise, a critically endangered and highly coveted species for the pet

trade, has fallen 25% over one generation to a current estimate of 200 mature individuals.

xviii

Air Transport Sector

Enforcement and customs agencies at airports around the world are struggling to keep up with growing

security and illicit goods concerns associated with rapidly increasing passenger and cargo traffic. For example,

covert testing of United States’ airports enforcement success rates in 2015 found that security screeners failed

to identify banned material in 95% of instances.

xix

The resulting investigation by the US Transportation

Security Administration (TSA) found that “Pressures driven by increasing passenger volume, an increase

in checkpoint screening of baggage due to fees charged for checked bags as well as inconsistent or limited

Flying Under the Radar

enforcement of size requirements for [bags]...create a stressed environment at airport checkpoints.”

With

yearly passenger traffic expected to double to 7.2 billion by 2035,

xxi

these problems will only intensify without

a substantial effort to upgrade and modernize airport security procedures.

Traffickers can exploit capacity problems, corruption, and other issues within the air transport sector to

move products, from something as small as an ivory bangle, to rhino horns wrapped in foil in a suitcase, to a

two-ton cargo shipment. Different enforcement strategies are needed depending on which specific transport

method (passenger, luggage, air freight) is chosen. Air freight shipments, for example, must be accompanied

by documentation like an air waybill. Ivory shipped as cargo will therefore leave a trail of paperwork behind,

likely complete with falsified information and other red flags that can be identified with the proper training

or technology. By contrast, passengers carrying live animals may be identified by suspicious behavior, full-

body scanners, or physical searches. Knowing how contraband is likely to be moving is therefore instrumental

to preventing trafficking through airports.

An airport’s exposure to trafficking of illicit goods can generally be determined by assessing the airport’s

size, flight routes, screening procedures, and infrastructure. Large international ports with lax screening

procedures for trafficked goods, but many connecting flights, are at the highest risk;

xxii

these airports present

traffickers with both plentiful flight options and a low risk of interdiction. Of those high-risk airports, the

ones that are in the process of expansion are some of the most vulnerable. Traffickers seem to pay particular

attention to opening flight routes, perhaps believing that enforcement and staff along new routes will be less

aware of the wildlife trafficking risk than those on well-established ones.

xxiii

Traffickers’ need for a diverse assortment of international flights leads them to frequently use large,

international hub airports. Dubai Airport in the United Arab Emirates, for instance, is the busiest airport

by passenger traffic in the world, seeing 77.5 million passengers in 2015.

xxiv

The UAE is also the only country

that appears as a prominent country for each category covered in this report, likely due at least in part to

Dubai’s advanced airport screening technologies.

For wildlife trafficking specifically, an airport’s location will also determine the type and number of illegal

wildlife and wildlife products that move through it. For example, Jomo Kenyatta Airport in Kenya is the

ninth busiest airport in Africa,

xxv

and has the most seizures of any of the airports within C4ADS’ Air Seizure

Database. It is the busiest airport in a strategic location on the East Coast of Africa,

xxvi

with a large number

of international flights that enable traffickers to move ivory and rhino horn from West, Central, or Southern

Africa through Jomo Kenyatta to Asian hubs like Suvarnabhumi Airport in Bangkok.

Convergence with Criminal Networks

The high profits and low risk associated with trafficking through airports have attracted the attention of

sophisticated criminal networks. These criminal organizations are able to exploit high corruption levels in

some airports to move large quantities of illicit goods frequently. In one instance, a Chinese national was

arrested in Guangzhou Baiyun Airport on his way back from Nigeria with 39.5 kilograms of ivory and 30.95

kilograms of rhino horn.

xxvii

The suspect told police, “Nigeria probably has the world’s most relaxed custom

regulations. You don’t even need to be present to check your luggage.”

xxviii

He was later linked to a Lagos-based

trafficking syndicate that had allegedly completed 18 successful shipments to Guangzhou buyers in one year.

xxix

In other instances, wildlife trafficking networks utilize the same individuals, routes, and modus operandi

as other illicit networks. A number of seizures have highlighted the overlap between narcotics and wildlife

Flying Under the Radar

trafficking supply chains in particular. In June of 2010, officials at Kuala Lumpur Airport discovered 285

radiated tortoises, 14 spider tortoises, and one ploughshare tortoise packed in two suitcases with drugs.

xxx

All

three species are listed under CITES Appendix I.

xxxi

The involvement of organized criminal syndicates in wildlife trafficking subverts developing economies, and

presents a substantial security risk to airports.

Health Risks

Beyond the environmental, economic, and security implications of wildlife trafficking, the illicit trade in live

animals presents a potential health risk to other animals and even humans. International and national health

agencies and organizations have instituted policies intended to mitigate the danger of imported live animals

carrying infectious diseases from their countries of origin. For example, birds can reportedly carry over 60

diseases that are transferrable to humans, including Salmonellosis, E. coli, avian tuberculosis, and multiple

bird flu virus strains.

xxxii xxxiii xxxiv

One strain, H5N1, has a mortality rate of about 60% according to the World

Health Organization.

xxxv

To combat this risk, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) currently

prohibits the importation of birds or bird eggs from 49 different countries “due to the presence of highly

pathogenic avian influenza.”

xxxvi

Wildlife traffickers, however, do not burden themselves with the paperwork

and procedures necessary to ensure the health of their cargo: 38% of seizures contained within the bird

category of C4ADS’ Air Seizure Database originated in one of these 49 prohibited countries.

Wildlife Trafficking & Seizure Data

The trends, transit routes, and modus operandi associated with wildlife trafficking are intrinsically difficult

to track – traffickers do not publicize their best practices. Seizure data, however, provides a window into the

otherwise opaque world of trafficking activity. Compiling detailed seizure data over time allows for analysis of

traffickers’ techniques and the flight routes they most frequently exploit, along with their evolution over time.

C4ADS acknowledges, however, a system-wide lack of consistent, accurate, adequately detailed, and publicly

available seizure information

xxxvii

for wildlife trafficking and similar crimes. A report released in September

2016, A review of global trends in CITES live wildlife confiscations, notes the utility of seizure data for enforcement

efforts and describes one of the largest inhibitors preventing comprehensive and detailed seizure analysis:

In order to effectively detect, monitor and address [the illegal wildlife trade (IWT)], national authorities

require detailed centralized information (such as the source, date, location, species, quantity, intended

destination and purpose) regarding seized shipments (UNODC 2012). Currently, a small number

of countries are reported to maintain national databases that record such information (UNODC

2012)…However, of the existing IWT databases, only seizure information from the Convention on

International Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES) trade database is currently

made fully available to the public for subsequent interpretation and analysis.

xxxviii

Although several wildlife seizure databases exist, those that are publicly available lack the detail necessary

for incorporation into the C4ADS Air Seizure Database. In particular, the databases that C4ADS examined

lacked transit method information, preventing C4ADS analysts from identifying seizures made in the air

transport sector. For example, the following databases, while useful for certain purposes, could not be used

for this report:

• CITES Trade Database: While the publicly available CITES Trade Database contains hundreds of

Flying Under the Radar

thousands of seizures, it does not specify seizures made by air, land, or sea, nor does it provide sufficient

detail to cross-reference seizures to avoid duplication. Furthermore, not all CITES signatories report

to the Management Authority as requested, and even for those countries that do report, CITES notes

that seizure information is “often absent or provided in insufficient detail.”

xxxix

• US Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS) LEMIS Database: C4ADS received extensive data from the LEMIS

database, which tracks all wildlife seizures within the United States, through a Freedom of Information

Act (FOIA) request. Although the seizures could be sorted by location (e.g. New York), the seizures

were not separated by air, land, or sea transit (e.g. John F. Kennedy Airport versus the Port of New

York), and therefore could not be incorporated in our analysis. C4ADS will be submitting a second

FOIA request for a more detailed version of the data.

• The Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS) Database: The ETIS Database records all seizures of

elephant specimens reported to CITES beginning in 1989, and is managed by TRAFFIC on behalf

of CITES.

Although the Database is likely the most comprehensive database on ivory seizures in the

world, it is not publicly available.

• The European Union (EU) Trade in Wildlife Information Exchange (TWIX): The EU-TWIX database holds

all seizures reported by the 28 EU Member States.

xli

The database is only available to wildlife law

representatives from within the EU.

Even when detailed seizure data is available, the data itself is vulnerable to a number of inherent biases. For

example, wildlife seizures are more likely to occur in jurisdictions where enforcement officials are aware of

and trained to look for wildlife trafficking, which may lead to the perception that trafficking is worse in

areas with better enforcement. In prominent transit jurisdictions, where enforcement has limited ability to

screen passengers and shipments between flights, officials are less likely to make seizures, leading either to a

lack of emphasis on those areas in the data, or creating the appearance of ineffective enforcement. A more

detailed discussion of the various drawbacks of seizure data can be found in the Methodology and Appendix

I: Seizure Data Biases & Vulnerabilities.

In Flying Under the Radar, we analyze the seizure data in C4ADS’ Air Seizure Database to identify evident

wildlife trafficking trends, while taking into account biases in the data. In some places, we rank countries,

airports, and transit routes by ‘prominence’ – in other words, prominence within the Database – with the

understanding that a more complete dataset could provide different results. The majority of our analysis

should be interpreted similarly; our findings showcase the patterns visible within our Database, and should

not necessarily be construed to be more broadly applicable.

Still, seizures provide enforcement and the public with a rare window into the day-to-day operations of

traffickers. Compiling and analyzing seizures by type or category can begin to ‘pull back the veil’ shrouding

illicit supply chains in secrecy, illuminating previously unknown aspects of trafficking and providing

enforcement agencies with valuable information. Crafting anti-trafficking strategies based on this information

may improve the likelihood that the illicit wildlife trade through airports can be stopped.

Flying Under the Radar

Methodology

This report is intended to provide insight into the mechanisms that allow, abet, or fail to stop wildlife

trafficking through the air transport sector, focusing in particular on the most common trends,

routes, and modus operandi utilized by wildlife traffickers. The information within this report is

based on C4ADS’ Air Seizure Database, which covers seizures from January 2009 to August 2016. The

Database was compiled over a period of three months through extensive, multilingual open source

xlii

research conducted by C4ADS analysts and supplemented wherever possible by additional resources, including

correspondence with law enforcement personnel and other organizations in the anti-wildlife trafficking

sphere.

Throughout Flying Under the Radar, we refer to the data contained within the Database as both ‘seizures’ and

‘trafficking instances.’ We use the term ‘seizures’ to refer to the physical interdiction of wildlife or wildlife

products within an airport, whereas ‘trafficking instances’ refer to seizures in a broader context; for instance,

if a country makes no seizures but experiences a lot of trafficking activity through its airports, it would be

inaccurate and misleading to quantify that trafficking activity in terms of number of seizures (e.g. ‘Country X

has 10 seizures, but made none’). Instead, we would attempt to quantify that activity in terms of ‘trafficking

instances’, or the number of times illegal wildlife traffickers or shipments moved through or were intended

to move through a specific country or airport (e.g. ‘Country X has 10 trafficking instances, but made no

seizures’).

The Data

C4ADS chose to focus on ivory, rhino horn, live reptiles, and live birds in particular to establish a baseline

of information that can be built upon moving forward. Focus on these particular species and categories,

rather than the entirety of wildlife trafficking, allows us to obtain results that are both detailed and broadly

representative of wildlife trafficking.

xliii

Together, these four categories represent 66% of trafficked wildlife

products in UNODC’s World Wildlife Seizure Database (World WISE).

xliv

The number of seizures contained within each

category in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database

varies for a number of reasons. First, reporting

standards vary by category. For example, given

the popularity of elephants and their increasingly

well-documented plight, ivory seizures are

more likely to receive media attention than,

for instance, a seizure of two endangered

canaries. Second, the number of seizures in

each category is in part determined by the

characteristics of the animal being trafficked,

such as the size of the species’ population, or

the ease of transporting a particular species or

product. For example, rhino horn is trafficked

far less frequently, and in far fewer numbers,

than ivory and other animal products, in large

part due to the inherent difficulty in obtaining

rhino horn.

146

283

259

100

200

Ivory Rhino Horn Reptiles Birds

Seizure Count

Figure 1. Number of air seizures contained within the C4ADS Air Seizure

Database by category

Flying Under the Radar

All four categories are plagued by a lack of publicly available, detailed seizure data to varying extents. Ivory and

rhino horn seizures receive the most media attention and are therefore the most complete, while information

on reptile and bird seizures is by far the least detailed. Many seizures are reported simply as seizures of ‘birds’,

or ‘snakes’ without much additional information. This kind of reporting can be challenging to incorporate

in our analysis, as it lacks species, transit, or transport method information, which is critical to an analysis

of trafficking trends. We have worked to overcome this information gap by researching every seizure we

identified in order to obtain as much supporting evidence for each as possible.

C4ADS compiled information on each seizure’s date, location, weight or quantity, species, detailed transit

route information (city-specific wherever possible), obfuscation method, transport method, manner of

detection, airline and flight number, and any relevant additional information. We defined ‘transport method’

as passenger clothing/items, checked luggage, or air freight, and ‘obfuscation method’ as the way in which

contraband had been concealed (e.g. inside a shipment of timber). Some categories, like seizure location,

seizure airport, and transport method, were available for well over three quarters of the seizures, while other

categories, like obfuscation method, method of detection, and airline, were available for less than a quarter

of the seizures we collected.

The publicly available resources we used for this report included, but were not limited to:

• Local news reports

• CITES annual reports

• Robin des Bois’s On the Trail Bulletins

• TRAFFIC Bulletins

• Academic or statistical reports (e.g. CITES ETIS reports, etc.)

100%

98.1%

99.7%

75.2%

32.1%

74.9%

36.9%

58.9%

13.2%

89.9%

18.5%

19.7%

52.4%

Airline

Method of Detection

Obfuscation Method

Transit Location(s)

Weight of Items Seized

Species

Number of Items Seized

Destination Location

Origin Location

Mode of Transport

Seizure Airport

Seizure Location

Date

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

Information Availability

Figure 2. Data availability for each seizure within the C4ADS Air Seizure Database

Flying Under the Radar

As mentioned above, C4ADS analysts cross-referenced seizures across multiple sources whenever possible.

Photos and videos in particular were used to verify reported seizure information, and were stored in the

Database alongside relevant seizures. C4ADS analysts also relied on some confidential seizure information.

This information was used to better understand our results and support our findings, although no confidential

data is specifically discussed within the report.

The methodology for specific graphs and graphics from each section can be found in the appendices. The

majority of the graphics developed for this report were made using R 3.3.1.

xlv

See Appendix II: R Packages

for the R packages we used.

Data Gaps & Biases

The accuracy of the data compiled within these categories, and as a result C4ADS’ associated analysis, is

dependent on a variety of factors. Some airports and countries more proactively report on wildlife seizures,

leading to an overrepresentation of those locations in the Database. Other countries simply have better

enforcement, while still other countries have effective customs and security agencies at their ports but do

not prioritize the identification of illegal wildlife. In other cases, seizures are frequently reported on, but

the available seizure information is contrasting, inaccurate, or incomplete. Some jurisdictions frequently

report on seizures, but fail to release crucial information, such as transit routes or transport method, further

affecting the accuracy of the data. We did not include any aggregated seizure information (e.g. ‘Between

2013 and 2015, 100 ivory seizures were made at X Airport’) to prevent double-counting seizures, and because

aggregate seizure numbers tell us little about wildlife trafficking trends, routes, or modus operandi.

One of seizure data’s biggest failings is inherent to its very nature – seizures only capture trafficking strategies

that have been ineffective. As a result, seizure information may reflect trafficking methods that are already

known to enforcement, but entirely miss the most effective smugglers and their contraband. Furthermore,

media reports on seizures are more likely to cover the most newsworthy trafficking instances – generally either

large-scale shipments or unusual trafficking attempts (e.g. birds hidden in a smuggler’s underwear). Small-

scale, mundane trafficking, such as a couple ivory bangles carried by unwitting tourists, is far less likely to be

reported on and reach the open source.

Another significant downside to seizure data is its frequent inability to determine the cause of trafficking

patterns. For instance, it is often impossible to tell whether airports with high seizure counts are making so

many seizures because of extremely effective enforcement strategies, or if the volume of trafficking through

those airports is high enough or blatant enough to create the appearance of effective enforcement. Even so,

identifying detailed route information for seizures (i.e. where did a shipment originate, what airports did it

transit through, and what airport was it destined for) can help clarify this issue by revealing which airports

frequently fail to stop contraband along each route. Further discussion of the various biases and failings of

seizure data can be found in Appendix I: Seizure Data Biases & Vulnerabilities.

Despite these disadvantages, seizure data provides valuable insight into traffickers’ operations. Adequately

detailed and carefully interpreted seizure data can even compensate for some of its shortcomings. As a result,

we base our analysis on detailed seizure data, but provide caveats as appropriate.

Flying Under the Radar

Trends and Totals

Identifying and tracking patterns in combined seizure data provides insight into international wildlife

trafficking and how it has shifted, or remained the same, over time. This type of information has myriad

uses. It can, for example, direct anti-poaching efforts on the ground as emerging poaching and trafficking hot

spots shift, help enforcement agencies anticipate the most likely next moves of trafficking networks, and track

relative enforcement success rates over time. In this section, we examine the geographic spread of wildlife

trafficking, as well as fluctuations in the number and size of seizures made each year. Overall, according

to C4ADS’ Air Seizure Database, 114 countries had at least one instance of wildlife trafficking in the air

transport sector between January 2009 and August 2016.

The following heat maps are a representation of the number of known trafficking instances associated with

each country. Each instance is included in the maps using its country-level route information (origin, transit,

and destination location), rather than its seizure location. For instance, if a cargo shipment was stopped at

its origin in Uganda, we counted Uganda as its origin location. Similarly, if an individual was caught carrying

baby birds through an airport in Brazil on their way from Peru to the United States, we counted Brazil as a

transit location, Peru as an origin location, and the United States as a destination location for that trafficking

instance. If neither origin, nor transit, nor destination information was available for a trafficking instance, it

could not be included in the heat maps. The origin location was defined as the origin of the shipment, rather

than the origin of the wildlife or wildlife product, which we defined as the source. Of the seizures within the

Database, 120, or 15.5%, are not represented in Figure 3 due to a lack of trafficking instance information.

Figure 3 maps all of the countries that illegal ivory, rhino horn, reptile, or bird traffickers moved or intended

to move their contraband through between January 2009 and August 2016, according to the C4ADS Air

Seizure Database. The media and enforcement attention given to ivory, and as a result, the comparatively

high number of ivory seizures within our Database, may have led to an overrepresentation of Africa and Asia

in the above heat map.

Figure 3. Global heat map for all trafficking instances in the air transport sector between January 2009 and August 2016

The heat map represents the total number of times that a successful or planned trafficking instance was recorded for each

country. The map includes instances where the product did not actually enter a country because it was seized earlier in the route.

Flying Under the Radar

East and Southeast Asian countries constitute six of the top ten

countries ranked by number of air trafficking instances in Table 1.

China stands out in particular in this analysis with the most instances

of wildlife trafficking overall. The disparity in trafficking instances

between China and the other countries is in part caused by its central

role in the ivory trade, which constitutes 101 out of China’s 174 total

trafficking instances. Other countries, such as Kenya and the United

Arab Emirates (UAE), have had a high number of trafficking instances

due to their role as transit points for products destined for markets in

Asia.

As shown in Figure 4, all four categories show similarly low seizure

numbers in 2009 and 2010, followed by significant growth in ivory,

reptile, and bird seizures in 2011 and 2012. This is likely due to

steadily increasing media and public focus on wildlife trafficking in

those years, largely as a result of increased interest in the illegal ivory

trade. It is also possible that, as in the case of ivory trafficking, wildlife

trafficking in general began to spike after 2008.

xlvi

For example, reptile

seizures in the air transit sector appear to have increased almost as

much ivory seizures, at their peak in 2015 recording more seizures than ivory. But despite increased law

enforcement attention and awareness, the total number of rhino horn seizures has remained relatively

constant throughout the reporting period, while bird seizures have declined slightly following an upsurge

from 2009 to 2012.

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Seizure Count

Ivory

Rhino Horn

Reptiles

Birds

Figure 4. Seizure count timeline by category between January 2009 and August 2016

Country Sum

China 174

Thailand 102

United Arab Emierates 82

Kenya 69

India 57

Vietnam 53

Malaysia 52

Indonesia 49

USA 36

Mozambique 32

Table 1. Top ten countries by number of

trafficking instances between January 2009

and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

Figure 5 exhibits the countries counting the highest numbers of seizures. China ranks first due to its prominent

role in all four categories. With such a high volume of illicit wildlife being trafficked into the country, and

simply by virtue of being such a populous country, it may be inevitable that China has the highest rate of

seizures. Given the hidden nature of trafficking activity, it is impossible to know whether the size of China’s

ivory market or good enforcement contribute more to China’s high seizure count. Recently, however, China

has openly opposed the illegal ivory trade, and in 2016, committed to closing its ivory markets by the end of

2017.

xlvii

How China’s ivory seizure count is affected by this change may provide some indication of whether

enforcement or market activity drives the high number of seizures in Chinese airports.

Kenya, the country with the second highest seizure count, is perhaps the most common transit country

for wildlife moving by air from Africa to East and Southeast Asia. Kenyan authorities have been proactive

in addressing wildlife crime moving through Jomo Kenyatta Airport in Nairobi, leading to its high seizure

count.

xlviii

Like China, Thailand is a major destination for wildlife products. Malawi appears prominently in

the data largely due to a May 2015 report on wildlife seizures and trafficking produced for the Department of

National Parks and Wildlife of Malawi.

xlix

Countries like the United Kingdom, Nigeria, and France have high seizure counts for a variety of reasons.

Nigeria has one of the largest airports in West Africa, likely contributing to its frequent use as a departure

point for passengers and shipments, particularly those on their way to Europe or East Africa. France is both a

frequent transit point and destination for travelers leaving Africa. The United Kingdom, like France, features

as both a transit and destination point, although trafficking instances through the UK seem to involve a more

diverse array of illegal wildlife and wildlife products than wildlife trafficked through France.

Other countries are specific to certain species. For example, India seems to be the epicenter of South Asian

reptile trafficking. Pakistan also features prominently in reptile trafficking, although it appears to play a

role in Middle Eastern bird trafficking as well. Russia comes up as a frequent origin for falcons and hawks

destined for Middle Eastern raptor markets.

Mexico

France

Russia

Taiwan

Bangladesh

Nigeria

Pakistan

Brazil

Mozambique

United Kingdom

Madagascar

South Africa

USA

Indonesia

Vietnam

Uganda

India

UAE

Malawi

Thailand

Kenya

China

0 20 40 60 80

Seizure Count

Figure 5. Number of seizures by country for those countries with more than 10 seizures between January 2009 and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

Country Enforcement Index

Assessing the ability of enforcement agencies to address covert crimes is inherently difficult. Seizure

data combined with transit route data, however, delivers an approximation of enforcement success

rates. The Country Enforcement Index is a quantitative representation of each country’s ability to

detect and seize illicit wildlife products traveling through its airports. Higher numbers indicate more

effective enforcement and lower numbers indicate that the country is unable to detect a large number of

illicit products going through its airports. Note, however, that luggage and cargo are rarely re-screened

during transit stops, and therefore frequent transit airports may have better enforcement than the Index

indicates. The percentages represented in this chart were derived using the following equation:

We define ‘successfully attempted trafficking instances’ as the number of times illicit wildlife products

were trafficked through a country, regardless of whether they were seized. Only countries linked to

twenty or more trafficking instances were included in Figure 6 (See Appendix IV for the Country

Enforcement Index for countries linked to five or more trafficking instances). Seizures made prior to

arrival in a given country were removed from that country’s assessment, as the country was never in a

position to stop that individual or shipment. For instance, a suitcase full of turtles stopped in Miami

on its way to the United Kingdom from Brazil would count as a missed shipment for Brazil, a successful

seizure for the US, and nothing at all for the UK. The Country Enforcement Index can therefore be

seen as a metric for the success of a country’s customs and enforcement agencies, although it still suffers

from the inconsistencies in reporting and biases of seizure data that trouble any analysis of global wildlife

trafficking trends. See Appendix IV for a more thorough discussion of the biases affecting the Index.

Figure 6. Country Enforcement Index for countries with twenty or more trafficking instances between January 2009 and

August 2016

61.9 %

82.3 %

76.9 %

72.7 %

79 %

63.3 %

91.7 %

38.7 %

28.6 %

47.8 %

75.9 %

68.9 %

84.6 %

88.5 %

Nigeria

Mozambique

South Africa

Brazil

Madagascar

UAE

Indonesia

Thailand

India

Kenya

China

USA

Vietnam

Malawi

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

Country Enforcement Indicator

Flying Under the Radar

Malawi appears as the country with the highest enforcement ratio: around 91.7% of air trafficking

instances detected involving Malawi were stopped at airports within the country. This is likely due to a

May 2015 report on wildlife trafficking and seizure activity in Malawi, although it should be noted that

few shipments have successfully made it through Malawi to be seized elsewhere, even after the release of

the 2015 report.

Another finding in the Country Enforcement Index is the fall in Thailand’s ranking from third place

by seizure number (Figure 5) to seventh place by Enforcement Indicator. This suggests that although

Royal Thai Customs and other Thai enforcement agencies make a large number of seizures, the volume

of trafficking incidents successfully moving through Thailand is even higher than the seizure number

suggests.

Flying Under the Radar

Trends and Totals – Ivory

The C4ADS Air Seizure Database recorded 283 total

seizures of ivory in airports between January 2009 and

August 2016, for a total of 32,974.97 kilograms of ivory.

Ivory trafficking through the air transport sector makes

up about 13% of total ivory seizures by weight since 2009.

Ivory seizures in the air transit sector (Figure 7) reached a

peak in 2013 with 73 seizures before declining slightly in

the years following. The increase in seizures from 2010 to

2013 may represent an overall growth in ivory trafficking

activity. In Illegal Trade in Ivory and Rhino Horn, Tom

Milliken notes, “the three most recent years – 2011, 2012,

and 2013 – represent the three years in which the highest

quantity of ivory was seized and reported to ETIS over the

last 25 years.”

Figure 7 reveals that large-scale seizures (greater than 500 kilograms) at airports have remained relatively

constant throughout the period covered.

lii

The slight growth of medium-scale seizures (between 100 and 500

kilograms) over that period may provide some insight into the operations of ivory traffickers. Changes in the

size of ivory consignments shipped by air over time (Figures 7 and 9) suggest that ivory trafficking networks

may increasingly prefer breaking large-scale shipments down into multiple smaller size shipments. This may be

due to a belief that smaller consignments are subject to less scrutiny, or a response to increased enforcement

pressure, or an attempt to mitigate the risks associated with the seizure of a large-scale shipment. Figure 8,

which displays the total weight of ivory seizures by year, shows that the weight of ivory seized in airports has

demonstrated slight growth throughout the period covered by this report, reaching its highest level in 2015.

The high average weight per seizure in 2009 and 2010 suggests that the media may only have reported on

large-scale seizures in those years (Figure 7). Large-scale seizures may be overrepresented in the data as a whole,

since specific weight is more likely to be reported for significant seizures. In later years, as attention to ivory

trafficking increased, local media reports began publishing stories on smaller-scale seizures as well. Likely in

accordance with this change, the average weight of ivory seizures per year (Figure 9) dropped significantly

beginning in 2011, even as the number of ivory seizures continued to rise.

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Seizure Count

All Seizures

Seizures 100-500 kg

Seizures > 500 kg

100

200

300

400

500

600

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Weight (kg)

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Weight (kg)

Figure 9. Average weight of ivory seized (kg) per year between

January 2009 and August 2016

Figure 8. Weight of ivory seized (kg) per year between January

2009 and August 2016

Figure 7. Timeline of ivory seizures made in airports

between January 2009 and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

The heat map for ivory trafficking instances (Figure 10) highlights all the countries with intended or actual

ivory trafficking activity through their airports between January 2009 and August 2016. Figure 10 indicates

that Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa are the most significant regions for the illegal ivory trade through airports.

The other countries featured in the heat map would be more prominent if not for China’s outsized demand

for ivory relative to the rest of the world. China has almost double the number of trafficking instances as

compared to Kenya, highlighting the important role that it continues to play in the illegal ivory trade.

liii

Thailand and Vietnam are also significant destinations for ivory moved by air, with 34 and 23 trafficking

instances respectively between January 2009 and August 2016.

In Africa, Kenya has the largest number of ivory trafficking instances

by air with 52. Kenya’s high rate of trafficking instances has been

attributed to “…Kenya’s relatively well-developed transportation

infrastructure.”

liv

More specifically, Jomo Kenyatta Airport’s role as

the busiest airport in East Africa,

as well as its position between

Africa and Asia, likely leads to its central role as a transit point for

ivory.

Other hub airports in East Africa and the Middle East are frequently

used as transit airports as well. The UAE and Ethiopia also function

as transit hubs, connecting flights from Central and West Africa to

Asian airports. The UAE is the only country in the top ten list for

all four categories, highlighting the importance of transit hubs in

facilitating the international flow of illicit wildlife.

Europe and the United States display relatively few ivory trafficking

instances, although a number of European airports are increasingly

used as transit points between West African and Asian airports.

Figure 10. Global heat map for ivory trafficking instances in the air transport sector between January 2009 and August 2016

Country Trafcking

Instances

China 102

Kenya 52

Thailand 34

Malawi 24

Vietnam 23

Nigeria 22

United Arab Emirates 22

Ethiopia 21

DRC 17

Angola 16

Table 2. Top ten countries by number of ivory

trafficking instances between January 2009

and August 2016

The heat map represents the total number of times that a successful or planned trafficking instance was recorded for each

country. The map includes instances where the product did not actually enter a country because it was seized earlier in the route.

Flying Under the Radar

Parisian Antiques and Excess Luggage

A number of seizures have highlighted the importance of front companies to ivory and rhino horn

traffickers. In some cases, Parisian antiques stores are implicated; in other cases, more typical front

companies are used, including used tire, auto, and auto parts businesses, as well as companies exporting

cheap products in bulk, like plastic scrap, shredded paper, or beans.

On January 23, 2013, Dong Mou, a Chinese antiques shop owner, was caught in Shanghai Pudong

Airport with three suitcases full of illegal ivory and rhino horn products.

lvi

He had arrived in Shanghai

on China Eastern Airlines flight MU554 from Paris.

lvii

According to Chinese news reports on the seizure,

Dong had traveled to France seven times as part of his antiques business, but claimed that he had only

purchased ivory and rhino horn products on this one occasion.

lviii

Two months later in March of 2013, Chinese media reported that two Chinese travelers on their way home

from France had been discovered at Shanghai Pudong Airport carrying illegal elephant ivory, mammoth

ivory, and rhino horn.

lix

The two suspects were carrying five suitcases packed with 13 kilograms of rhino

horn, 42 kilograms of ivory, and 1.3 kilograms of mammoth ivory.

They allegedly confessed to officials

that the illicit items were purchased at antiques stores in Paris.

lxi

Officials discovered 142 kilograms of ivory in six suitcases in Charles de Gaulle Airport.

lxii

All six bags belonged to one passenger

who was traveling from Angola to Vietnam through Paris.

lxiii

lxiv

Other seizures outside of the air transport sector have been linked to Parisian antiques as well. In

September 2015, French customs officials searched a vehicle and discovered four raw elephant tusks,

equaling 43 kilograms of ivory, hidden inside.

lxv

According to a French press release, French authorities

investigated the three individuals present in the car at the time of the seizure and uncovered links between

all three suspects and an international wildlife trafficking organization, headed by a French-Vietnamese

individual who owns a Paris-based international trading company dealing in antiques, perfume, and

beauty products.

lxvi

One customs official was quoted as saying, “He used [the international trading

company] to organize the trafficking of ivory.”

lxvii

On May 25th, 2016, officials searched the company’s

headquarters in Seine-Saint-Denis and discovered sixteen African elephant tusks, totaling 212 kilograms,

“hidden in wooden pallets in his office.”

lxviii

It was the largest ivory seizure conducted by French customs

since December 2006.

These seizures showcase a number of common trafficking methods – the use of a shell or cover company

to obfuscate the true nature of a trafficking business, an unusual number of suitcases per passenger – as

well as a trafficking route between Charles de Gaulle Airport and Shanghai Pudong Airport.

Image 1. One seizure in early June 2016 further highlighted traffickers’ reliance on excess luggage to move contraband.

Flying Under the Radar

Trends and Totals – Rhino Horn

The C4ADS Air Seizure Database recorded 85

total seizures of rhino horns in airports between

January 2009 and August 2016. Rhino horn

was seized along with ivory in 23 instances, or

27% of the time. Rhino horn seizure size can be

reported by number of rhino horns or by weight,

preventing a completely reliable estimate of total

rhino horn seized in the time period analyzed.

lxix

However, using an approximate weight of 2.78

kilograms per horn,

lxx

estimates can be made.

lxxi

Rhino horn seizures (Figure 11) have remained

relatively constant compared to ivory seizures,

staying around the overall mean of 11 seizures

per year. The upward growth in rhino horn

seizures in the initial two years is followed by a

significant dip in 2011 and 2012.

Large-scale seizures in airports (over 30 kilograms), depicted in Figure 11, have been fairly infrequent, despite

an increase in 2013 and 2014.

lxxii

Medium-scale seizures (between 10 and 30 kilograms) generally account for

a little less than half of all rhino horn seizures each year. 2015 was an unusual year in that overall seizure

numbers spiked, but medium- and large-scale seizure numbers remained low – even lower than in 2014, which

had ten fewer seizures than 2015. This may signal a shift from larger to smaller rhino horn shipments.

The weight of rhino horns seized per year (Figure 12) peaked in 2013, with 359 kilograms recorded seized.

There was a notable decline in the weight of rhino horns seized in 2011, which coincides with the dip in

overall seizures mentioned above. The average weight of rhino horns per seizure (Figure 13) in 2011 was also

low, indicating that 2011 may have been an unusual year for either rhino horn trafficking or reporting of

rhino horn trafficking incidents. The average weight of rhino horns per seizure grew steadily between 2011

and 2014, but saw a temporary drop in 2015, prior to a large spike in the first part of 2016.

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Weight (kg)

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Seizure Count

All Seizures

Seizures 10-30 kg

Seizures > 30 kg

100

200

300

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Weight (kg)

Figure 13. Average weight of rhino horn seized (kg) per year

between January 2009 and August 2016

Figure 12. Weight of rhino horn seized (kg) per year between

January 2009 and August 2016

Figure 11. Timeline of rhino horn seizures made in airports between

January 2009 and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

Rhino horn trafficking, although geographically similar to ivory

trafficking, has the narrowest supply chain of the four categories

in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database. Rhino horn trafficking is far

more concentrated in Southern Africa and East Asia than ivory.

The rhino horn heat map (Figure 14) depicts all countries that

experienced attempted or actual rhino horn trafficking activity

during the period of interest, and clearly reflects the importance

of Mozambique and South Africa as supply countries. China,

Vietnam, and Thailand are prominent on the demand side

of the trade. Although Vietnam is widely considered to be the

largest market for rhino horn,

lxxiii

C4ADS’ seizure data suggests

that China also plays a major role in the rhino horn trade; China

was the destination for 25 seizures in the Database with a total

weight of 548 kilograms, while Vietnam was the destination for 18

seizures, with a total weight of 466 kilograms (Table 3). Qatar and

the UAE are also highly ranked in Table 3, likely due to their roles

as transit points for traffickers headed to Asia.

Country Trafcking

Instances

China 24

Mozambique 19

Vietnam 18

South Africa 11

Qatar 10

Kenya 9

Thailand 9

France 5

United Arab Emirates 5

Nigeria 4

The heat map represents the total number of times that a successful or planned trafficking instance was recorded for each

country. The map includes instances where the product did not actually enter a country because it was seized earlier in the route.

Table 3. Top ten countries by number of rhino

horn trafficking instances between January

2009 and August 2016

Figure 14. Global heat map for rhino horn trafficking instances in the air transport sector between January 2009 and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

Trends and Totals – Reptiles

The C4ADS Air Seizure Database identified

259 total seizures of live reptiles in airports

between January 2009 and August 2016, for

a total of 121,497 seized reptiles. Besides a

minor dip in 2013, reptile seizure numbers

(Figure 15) have grown steadily since 2009,

reaching a peak of 61 seizures in 2015.

Large-scale seizures (greater than 1,000 reptiles)

have remained constant, at approximately five

seizures per year, with the exception of 2011,

when no large-scale seizures were made.

lxxiv

Medium-scale seizures (between 100 and

1,000 reptiles) have grown steadily. These

seizures represent a significant portion of total

reptile seizures, growing to about half of all

seizures each year between 2013 and 2016.

Figure 16 depicts the total number of reptiles seized per year in the air transport sector. The number of

reptiles seized per year between 2013 and 2016 is substantially higher than in the initial four years covered by

this study. A peak of 30,016 reptiles were seized in 2013. The average number of animals per seizure (Figure

17) reveals a 575% increase in the number of reptiles per trafficking attempt between 2012 and 2013, growing

from 158 in 2012 to 909 in 2013. This is because of a couple of unusually large seizures in 2013, including

a seizure of 9,000 red-eared slider turtles in Chennai, India in March 2013

lxxv

and a seizure of 10,043 red-

eared slider turtles in Kolkata, India in July.

lxxvi

However, the average number of reptiles per seizure remained

comparatively high after 2013, which may signify a shift towards larger-scale reptile trafficking attempts during

this time period, or an increase in enforcement capabilities or seizure reporting.

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Number of Reptiles

All Seizures

Seizures 100-1000 Reptiles

Seizures > 1000 Reptiles

10000

20000

30000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Number of Reptiles

250

500

750

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Number of Reptiles

Figure 17. Average number of reptiles per seizure between

January 2009 and August 2016

Figure 16. Number of reptiles seized per year between January

2009 and August 2016

Figure 15. Timeline of reptile seizures made in airports between January

2009 and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

The heat map for reptile trafficking instances (Figure 18) is more geographically diverse than those for ivory

and rhino horn, which clearly reflect an African and Asian focus. South Asia emerges as the epicenter of

the illegal reptile trade, and focus shifts from Africa to the Americas. The top five countries for reptile

trafficking instances (Table 4) are concentrated in and around South, East, and Southeast Asia, highlighting

the importance of this region for the illicit reptile trade.

The high number of trafficking instances in India appears to be

primarily driven by the export of Indian star tortoises (CITES

Appendix II) and black pond turtles (CITES Appendix I). Out of

54 total reptile trafficking instances involving India, 41 originated

in the country. Of these 41 instances, 24 contained Indian star

tortoises and 13 contained black pond turtles. The turtles were

mainly destined for Thailand, China, and Malaysia. A study

documenting the illegal trade in Indian star tortoises argues

that high demand for these turtles in China and Thailand is

responsible for the high rate of trafficking.

lxxvii

This finding is

reflected in C4ADS’ data. For example, while India is mainly an

origin point in the reptile trade, Thailand is mainly a destination.

Out of 53 total reptile trafficking instances involving Thailand, 37

were destined for the country.

Although Africa is not central to the reptile category of the

Database, Madagascar is an important origin for trafficked reptiles,

with 31 total trafficking instances. Many of the seized animals were

radiated and ploughshare tortoises (both CITES Appendix I), two

critically endangered species that are native to Madagascar.

Country Trafcking

Instances

India 54

Thailand 53

China 43

Indonesia 35

Malaysia 35

Madagascar 31

United Arab Emirates 27

Bangladesh 17

Mexico 15

USA 14

The heat map represents the total number of times that a successful or planned trafficking instance was recorded for each

country. The map includes instances where the product did not actually enter a country because it was seized earlier in the route.

Table 4. Top ten countries by number of reptile

trafficking instances between January 2009

and August 2016

Figure 18. Global heat map for reptile trafficking instances in the air transport sector between January 2009 and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

Trends and Totals – Birds

The C4ADS Air Seizure Database recorded 146 total

seizures of birds in airports between January 2009

and August 2016, totaling 9,934 seized birds. The

number of bird seizures (Figure 19) has remained

relatively constant during this time period, hovering

around an average of 18 seizures per year. There was

a marked decline in bird seizures in 2013, following

three years of slow but constant growth between

2009 and 2012.

Large-scale seizures (greater than 150 birds) have

declined slightly, and do not correspond to the

variability of the overall seizure numbers.

lxxviii

Medium-scale seizures (between 15 and 150 birds),

however, do reflect the changes in overall bird seizure

numbers, with the exception of 2011, when medium-

scale seizures decreased rather than increased.

The total number of birds seized per year (Figure 20) peaked in 2010, when 3,190 birds were seized. This

peak is due to two large seizures, one of 1,000 African grey parrots in Douala, Cameroon in February

lxxix

and

another of 1,000 birds, mostly of protected species, in Dhaka, Bangladesh in July.

lxxx

The spike in birds seized

in 2014 was driven by two large seizures of 470 and 400 birds in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.

lxxxi

Other than

2014, the total number of birds seized in airports per year has declined steadily between 2010 and 2016.

The average number of birds per seizure (Figure 21) displays few large variations in the number of birds per

trafficking attempt from year to year. Aside from the exceptional year of 2010, the average number of birds

per seizure has remained relatively constant around 50. This low average is likely due to the difficulty of

transporting a large number of birds by air freight or in carry-on baggage; the comparatively fragile nature of

most bird species prevents them from being packaged tightly or in large numbers. As a result, most birds are

carried on traffickers’ persons, and therefore can only be moved in relatively small numbers.

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Seizure Count

All Seizures

Seizures 15-150 Birds

Seizures > 150 Birds

1000

2000

3000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Number of Birds

100

150

200

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Number of Birds

Figure 21. Average number of birds seized per year between

January 2009 and August 2016

Figure 20. Number of birds seized per year between January

2009 and August 2016

Figure 19. Timeline of bird seizures made in airports between

January 2009 and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

The heat map for bird trafficking instances through airports worldwide (Figure 22) is similar to the reptile

heat map in its geographic diversity. The bird category of the C4ADS Air Seizure Database centers on North

and South America, with some activity in Asia and the Middle East. The UAE has the highest number of bird

trafficking instances according to the Database. This appears to be due in part to the Emirati falcon trade;

24 out of the UAE’s 28 bird trafficking instances were destined for the country, and 13 of those trafficking

instances involved falcons.

Brazil’s high number of trafficking instances was in part the result of

the domestic trade in tropical birds. Seven of the seizures recorded in

the Database are from domestic flights. Since trafficking instances are

counted each time a plane lands in a different airport, these domestic

seizures are counted twice in Table 5, once for the origin city and

once for the transit or destination city. Similar to Brazil, 10 out of

Russia’s 15 trafficking instances are from domestic flights. 14 of these

15 seizures involved falcons.

The United States ranks third in terms of bird trafficking instances,

with 19 total instances. The US was listed as the destination for 18 of

these trafficking instances, seven of which involved finches from Cuba

and South America. The demand for finches appears to be driven

in part by the popularity of songbird speed-singing competitions in

South American immigrant communities in the US.

lxxxii

Country Trafcking

Instances

United Arab Emirates 28

Brazil 23

USA 19

Russia 15

Pakistan 12

Indonesia 11

Guyana 10

Vietnam 8

Mexico 8

USA 7

The heat map represents the total number of times that a successful or planned trafficking instance was recorded for each

country. The map includes instances where the product did not actually enter a country because it was seized earlier in the route.

Table 5. Top ten countries by number of bird

trafficking instances between January 2009

and August 2016

Figure 22. Global heat map for reptile trafficking instances in the air transport sector between January 2009 and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

Hair Curlers from Guyana

Bird traffickers, generally unable to rely on air freight to conceal their contraband, must find creative

ways to store birds in their luggage or on their persons. Unlike ivory and rhino horn smugglers,

bird traffickers must also find a way to keep their illicit cargo quiet throughout the journey without

substantially harming them. One smuggling network devised a system utilizing bright lights, rum, and

hair curlers to hide finches in their clothing or carry-on bags.

In April of 2016, two individuals, Dhanwattie Persaud and Kayun Mohammed, were found attempting

to smuggle Guyanese finches and other birds out of Cheddi Jagan Airport in Guyana in two separate

instances. Persaud was scheduled to fly to John F. Kennedy Airport in New York on a Caribbean Airlines

flight, and Mohammed was destined to leave on a Fly Jamaica flight for Canada the next day.

lxxxiii

Both were discovered carrying birds stuffed inside hair curlers during the luggage screening process.

lxxxiv

Each received the standard six-month prison sentence for smuggling birds out of Guyana without the

necessary permits.

lxxxv

Persaud and Mohammed were likely attempting to smuggle the birds into New York City, where they

could sell them to finch ‘racers.’ For years, men have been packing into a park in Queens every Sunday

to watch finches ‘race,’ or compete to hit the highest number of songs first.

lxxxvi

While some of the finches

used in the competitions are imported into the US through legal channels, it seems that a large number

of the birds are moved illegally, partially to avoid regulations that the competitors consider detrimental

to their health. For example, one man told US federal investigators that the birds “are not the same after

they go through quarantine,” referencing the 30-day quarantine required to bring birds into the United

States.

lxxxvii

Image 2. Finches hidden inside plastic hair curlers Source: US Fish and Wildlife Service

Flying Under the Radar

The upswing in bird seizures in JFK Airport resulting from the races led the US Fish and Wildlife

Service (FWS) to open an investigation, Operation G-Bird, into the finch trade from Guyana.

lxxxviii

FWS

agents discovered that “smugglers sometimes sedated the finches with rum or kept them awake with

spotlights before they were lowered, wings pressed in a straitjacket position, into enclosure devices.”

lxxxix

The traffickers frequently relied on hair curlers or cardboard tubes to smuggle the birds through security

and customs without setting off airports’ metal detectors. Despite the eight-years long investigation, the

Guyanese finch smuggling trade still seems to be fairly prominent:

• 2006: Terrence McLean was caught attempting to smuggle 13 finches into JFK Airport inside

plastic hair curlers in his carry-on bag.

Airport officials allegedly became suspicious when they

found grass seed in McLean’s suitcase.

xci

• 2012: US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents stopped Marlon Hariram after arriving

in JFK Airport on an Easy Jet flight from Cheddi Jagan Airport in Guyana.

xcii

Hariram had

stuffed nine finches in cardboard toilet paper rolls, and then covered them with netting and

packaging tape and tucked them up his sleeves.

xciii

After investigation, agents discovered that

Hariram had been caught smuggling finches three times in the US and once in Guyana.

xciv

• 2012: Guyanese officials stopped Shivashtil Ramrattan as he moved through Cheddi Jagan

Airport because he “looked suspicious.”

xcv

After a pat check, the officials discovered that he had

hidden two finches in hair curlers and stuffed them in the crotch of his pants.

xcvi

Ramrattan was

fined for attempting to illegally export the birds.

xcvii

• 2013: A Guyanese man was arrested on arrival at JFK Airport with a number of finches hidden

in plastic hair curlers.

xcviii

He was discovered when the birds were heard singing as he moved

through customs screening.

xcix

He was later sentenced to six months in jail.

• 2014: Guyanese officials arrested Nazeem Karim after he was discovered attempting to smuggle

25 finches and other birds hidden in hair curlers to New York on Travel Span flight V2502.

Karim was fined $100,000 and disqualified from obtaining an import/export license for five

years.

cii

• 2014: Officials at Cheddi Jagan Airport arrested Nazir Khan as he was about to board Caribbean

Airlines flight BW606 to Canada.

ciii

Although he had successfully made it through security and

customs, he was discovered when he stopped to help another passenger and dropped two hair

curlers stuffed with finches on the tarmac in the process.

civ

• 2014: The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) in Toronto Pearson Airport discovered 19

“songbirds” in Vishnu Narine’s jacket. The birds were inside plastic hair curlers that had been

taped together and then inserted into hidden pockets in the jacket’s lining.

Narine pled guilty

to a charge of causing distress to an animal and was sentenced to 12 months of probation and

a $400 fine.

cvi

Flying Under the Radar

Airports and Routes

Analysis based on seizure data naturally over-emphasizes countries with good enforcement and under-

emphasizes, or even fails to mention, countries performing poorly. This can be partially addressed by

collecting detailed and thorough data on the actual or intended transit routes of illicit shipments. Compiled

transit route data can help to reveal the scope of wildlife trafficking in previously overlooked jurisdictions, the

overall flow of the wildlife trade over time, as well as those airports that traffickers may consider less risky.

cvii

Although transit route information cannot be considered directly reflective of the success of enforcement

in certain airports, it can direct customs and enforcement to the weakest points in the air transport sector.

Understanding how common transit routes shift over time in response to pressure, such as improved

enforcement capabilities, can help customs anticipate changes in trafficking activity.

The following routes maps are a representation of the known flights associated with trafficking instances in

the Database. Trafficking instances were only included in this analysis if more than one location along the

flight route was available. For example, if a news article only reported that a bird was seized at its destination in

New York, but did not contain any information about its origin or transit location, it could not be included in

the routes maps. Flights were included, however, if route information was reported, but the smuggled wildlife

or wildlife product did not reach its intended transit or destination location. For example, if a trafficker was

intercepted in Nairobi prior to boarding a flight to Cairo, the route from Nairobi to Cairo was still included

in this analysis. Note that capital cities were used in the routes maps when only country-level information was

provided. Routes information was not grouped by airport, as airport-specific information is generally only

available for seizure locations, while origin, transit, and destination points are generally referred to by city

or country. 28.6%, or 221, of the seizures within C4ADS’ Air Seizure Database could not be included in the

routes maps due to inadequate flight information.

Figure 23. All trafficking routes by air recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database

The trafficking routes map represents the flights used to traffic wildlife products through the air transport sector. This includes

instances where the product did not actually enter a country because it was seized earlier in the route. The transparency of the line

for each route represents the number of times it was used and the bubbles represent the total number of flights to and from each city.

Flying Under the Radar

The specific roles that airports play within the international trafficking system are largely dependent on their

geographic location. For instance, most African airports are origin points for illicit ivory shipments, but

airports in the Greater Horn of Africa are generally transit points. Similarly, Middle Eastern airports serve as

common transit points for ivory moving from East or Southern Africa to Asia, while European airports are

frequently used to move ivory from West Africa to Asia. Southeast and East Asian airports are predominantly

destinations.

Figure 23 displays the wildlife trafficking routes recorded in C4ADS’ Air Seizure Database. The most

common routes for illicit products tend to follow the most frequent air passenger routes from hub airports

near supply markets in the Southern Hemisphere to hub airports near demand markets in the Northern

Hemisphere. Since hub airports are more likely to have a variety of international flight routes available for

traffickers to choose from, they are more likely to be exploited by traffickers than smaller, regional airports.

As a result, international airlines based at major hub airports are disproportionately exposed to trafficking.

Targeting these chokepoints will have a larger impact on traffickers’ operations than focusing on regional

airports alone.

A few instances in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database indicate that domestic flight routes are used as well.

This is particularly true in Brazil and Russia, both large countries with fairly well developed infrastructure

and significant illicit bird trades. Domestic flights in these countries appear to move tropical and raptor bird

species from more remote regions to prominent international airports in Sao Paulo and Moscow, where the

animals are moved to international flights. Still, only 14.8% of the 128 flights in the Database are domestic

flights.

The total country-level transit graph (Figure 24) counts the number of times a country has been linked to an

ivory, rhino horn, reptile, or bird trafficking instance. The graph is a representation of the transit data for

each country, and is intended to show each country’s relative role in the illicit wildlife supply chain.

Netherlands

Angola

Germany

Bangladesh

Singapore

Uganda

United Kingdom

Pakistan

DR Congo

Russia

Mexico

France

Ethiopia

Malawi

Brazil

Nigeria

Qatar

South Africa

Madagascar

Mozambique

USA

Indonesia

Malaysia

Vietnam

India

Kenya

UAE

Thailand

China

0 50 100 150

Trafficking Instance Count

Origin

Transit

Destination

Figure 24. Country level flight route information for countries with five or more trafficking instances between January 2009 and

August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

Six of the top ten countries shown in Figure 24 are primarily destinations. Destination countries often count

a higher number of trafficking instances, in part because illicit wildlife is generally sourced from several

different countries, but tends to consolidate in demand markets. In addition, passengers and shipments are

more likely to be screened on arrival at destination airports, likely leading to a higher number of seizures in

those jurisdictions. Four of those six destination countries, China, Thailand, Vietnam, and Malaysia, are

common destinations for ivory, rhino horn, and reptiles. The UAE is another major destination, largely due

to the import of birds and reptiles into the country, although it is also used by ivory and rhino horn traffickers

as a transit location on the way to Asian markets. The United States is also highlighted as a major destination

point for wildlife trafficking, mainly due to its role in the bird and reptile trades.

The major origin countries are generally more geographically diverse than the destination countries, and

therefore are associated with fewer trafficking instances than destination countries. Origin countries are

mostly split between African countries with major international airports (Kenya, Mozambique, Nigeria,

South Africa, Uganda), and countries with comparatively intact ecosystems and prominent reptile and bird

populations (India, Indonesia, Madagascar). Madagascar is the only exclusively origin country in Figure 24.

All of its trafficking instances represent the illegal export of native Malagasy reptile species.

At least two clear transit trends are visible in Figure 24. First, countries with high counts of transit instances

are generally located between the supply habitats and demand markets for ivory and rhino horn. For example,

the prominent transit countries reflect the general transit locations for ivory and rhino horn shipments

– large airports in or near the Horn of Africa and the Middle East (Kenya, the UAE, Qatar, Ethiopia).

Thailand, another common transit country, is occasionally used by ivory traffickers as a transit point on the

way to destination airports like Hong Kong. Similarly, France and other European nations are increasingly

mentioned as transit points for ivory traffickers seeking alternative routes for contraband moving from West

Africa to Asia. Second, bird and reptile transit locations do not appear prominently in the C4ADS Air

Seizure Database because for the most part, they do not exist. Bird and reptile traffickers seem to rely on

direct flights, rather than complex trafficking routes, likely due to the difficulty of transporting live animals.

In Figure 25, airport-level seizure data is broken down by category. Certain airports, including hubs like

Suvarnabhumi (Thailand), Dubai (UAE), Hong Kong (China), and Tan Son Nhat (Vietnam), see several

different types of wildlife products flowing through their airports. According to the Database, Suvarnabhumi

Airport is the only airport that has seized species from all four different wildlife categories covered in this

report. Others seize high numbers of one specific illicit wildlife product, generally determined by the airport’s

geographic location. Lilongwe Airport (Malawi), for example, has the third highest number of seizures

according to the Database. Over 95% of those seizures were of ivory, and the remaining 4.5% were of rhino

horn, which can be expected given Lilongwe’s proximity to elephant and rhino populations and poaching

hotspots.

Figure 25 further indicates that ivory and rhino horn seizures generally follow the same transit routes, and are

therefore often seized in the same airports. Reptile and bird seizures do not follow a similar pattern. Reptile

seizures generally occur in South and Southeast Asian airports (Suvarnabhumi in Thailand, Soekarno-Hatta

in Indonesia, Chennai in India, and Shahjalal in Bangladesh), with the exceptions of Dubai in the UAE and

Ivato in Madagascar. Bird seizures occur less frequently and are far more geographically diverse than the other

categories, although seizures tend to occur in the Middle East (Dubai in the UAE) and the Americas (Miami

and Los Angeles in the US, Sao Paulo in Brazil, and Cheddi Jagan in Guyana).

Flying Under the Radar

Bengaluru Airport

Cape Town Airport

Jinnah Airport

Sao Paulo–Guarulhos Airport

Abu Dhabi Airport

Heathrow Airport

Los Angeles Airport

Miami Airport

Addis Ababa Bole Airport

Changi Airport

Cheddi Jagan Airport

Brussels Airport

Cairo Airport

Chhatrapati Shivaji Airport

Guangzhou Baiyun Airport

Taiwan Taoyuan Airport

Charles de Gaulle Airport

Kuala Lumpur Airport

Beijing Capital Airport

Noi Bai Airport

Murtala Mohammed Airport

Shahjalal Airport

O.R. Tambo Airport

Shanghai Pudong Airport

Maputo Airport

Tan Son Nhat Airport

Ivato Airport

Chennai Airport

Soekarno-Hatta Airport

Hong Kong Airport

Entebbe Airport

Dubai Airport

Lilongwe Airport

Suvarnabhumi Airport

Jomo Kenyatta Airport

0 20 40

Seizure Count

Ivory

Rhino Horn

Reptiles

Birds

Figure 25. Airport seizure count by category for airports with five or more seizures between January 2009 and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

Airports and Routes – Ivory

Figure 26 displays the ivory trafficking routes recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database. 185, or 65%, of

the 283 ivory seizures recorded in the database contained sufficient information for inclusion in our ivory

routes analysis. There are 54 countries linked to ivory trafficking in the Database.

While ivory trafficking routes generally move from Africa to East Asia, our data suggest that traffickers tend

to utilize large hub airports along the way. This is likely due in part to the fact that hub airports are more

likely to have a variety of large international flights. East Africa is the largest African exit region for ivory;

shipments originating in Central or West Africa tend to fly through Nairobi, Addis Ababa, or occasionally

Entebbe prior to arrival in Asia. Other common transit points include Dubai and Doha in the Middle East,

as well as Paris, Amsterdam, and Istanbul in Europe.

The importance of transit hubs can be seen clearly in the data. Nairobi’s Jomo Kenyatta Airport is the busiest

airport in East and Central Africa,

cviii

and counted more flights associated with ivory trafficking instances

than any other city in the Database.

cix

Of the 79 ivory trafficking flights associated with airports in the city, 28

arrived in Nairobi from other African airports, and 51 departed from Nairobi. Out of the 51 flights departing

from Nairobi, 25 left Nairobi for Bangkok, Guangzhou, and Hong Kong. Kinshasa to Nairobi and Maputo

to Nairobi are two of the most frequently used flights identified in the Database, both with seven instances.

Nairobi to Bangkok is used twice as often, with 14 flights.

Figure 27 breaks down the prominent countries highlighted in the routes map by the number of times each

country was listed as an origin, transit, or destination point. The data is split by country, rather than airport, to

account for transit information reported at the country level. China emerges as the most common destination

The ivory trafficking routes map represents the flights used to traffic ivory products through the air transport

sector. This includes instances where the product did not actually enter a country because it was seized earlier in the

route. Each line represents one flight and the bubbles represent the total number of flights to and from each city.

Figure 26. Ivory trafficking routes by air recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database

Flying Under the Radar

for ivory moved through the air transport sector,

with over 100 successful or attempted trafficking

instances recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure

Database. Kenya has the second largest number of

trafficking instances, and appears only as a transit

and origin point for ivory.

Figure 27 does reveal some apparent anomalies:

South Africa as a transit location, and France as

a prominent country for ivory trafficking. South

Africa is occasionally chosen by traffickers as an

unusual transit route for ivory moving to Asia,

with shipments sometimes even transiting to

Australia before arrival in Southeast or East Asia.

France is a fairly common transit point for ivory

moving from West Africa to Asia, and can be

an origin point for ivory purchased in Paris and

destined for East Asian markets.

Ethiopia and the UAE are identified (Figure 27) as frequent transit points. Airports in common ivory origin

locations such as Harare, Nairobi, and Abuja all have direct flights to Dubai. These routes account for 11 of

the 16 total instances that have flown into Dubai Airport. Hong Kong is the most common destination for

ivory trafficked through Dubai, and accounts for 10 of the 17 flights leaving of Dubai. Note that Dubai and

Hong Kong are also the two busiest airports by passenger traffic in the world.

Common origin points for ivory include Malawi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Angola, Uganda,

and Kenya. According to the Great Elephant Census, all of these countries, except for Kenya, have fairly small

elephant populations, from an estimated 817 in

Malawi to 4,864 in Uganda.

cxi

By comparison,

elephant range states Tanzania and Botswana

have an estimated 42,871 and 130,451 elephants

respectively, despite significant population

declines in Tanzania.

cxii

This may suggest that

elephants are poached elsewhere before their

ivory is moved to locations with smaller elephant

populations, and perhaps lower rates of awareness,

prior to entering the air transport sector.

Figure 28 ranks each airport with at least five

seizures by the number of ivory seizures made in

that airport. Jomo Kenyatta Airport accounted

for the most seizures with 48, followed closely by

Kamuzu Airport in Malawi with 42, and Entebbe

Airport in Uganda with 30. Of the Asian transit

and destination airports, Suvarnabhumi and

Hong Kong rank highest.

Beijing Capital Airport

Guangzhou Baiyun Airport

Harare Airport

Kuala Lumpur Airport

Maputo Airport

Noi Bai Airport

Dubai Airport

Shanghai Pudong Airport

Addis Ababa Bole Airport

Cairo Airport

Tan Son Nhat Airport

Murtala Mohammed Airport

Hong Kong Airport

Suvarnabhumi Airport

Entebbe Airport

Lilongwe Airport

Jomo Kenyatta Airport

0 10 20 30 40 50

Seizure Count

Egypt

Singapore

Cambodia

Qatar

France

Zimbabwe

Mozambique

Malaysia

South Africa

Uganda

Angola

DR Congo

Ethiopia

Nigeria

UAE

Vietnam

Malawi

Thailand

Kenya

China

0 25 50 75 100

Trafficking Instance Count

Origin

Transit

Destination

Figure 28. Airport seizure count for airports with four or more ivory

seizures between January 2009 and August 2016

Figure 27. Country level flight route information for countries with

six or more ivory trafficking instances between January 2009 and

August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

Repeating Routes

Traffickers rarely design unique smuggling methods for each trafficking instance. Instead, seizure

information reveals that traffickers frequently utilize trafficking routes repeatedly, often in tandem with

certain modus operandi, over the course of days, weeks, or even months. Two seizures in 2015 support

the theory that trafficking networks use the same strategies repeatedly.

On September 2, 2015, Hong Kong Customs examined an air freight package that seemed suspicious

to officials after a standard X-ray screening.

cxiii

Customs opened the package and discovered 24

kilograms of worked ivory packed in sawdust, rather than the ‘decorative tiles’ that had been declared

on the consignment’s air waybill.

cxiv

The shipment had originated in Zimbabwe and transited through

Amsterdam before arrival in Hong Kong.

cxv

Four days later, Hong Kong Customs officials discovered two more airmail parcels. Both were declared

as ‘decorative tiles,’ and both had originated in Zimbabwe and transited through Amsterdam.

cxvi

Upon

opening the boxes, officials discovered 51 kilograms of worked ivory pieces packed in sawdust, just as the

previous shipment had been.

cxvii

This example is typical of many seized ivory consignments; multiple shipments are stopped within days

or weeks of each other, all having taken the same transit route, packaged in the same way, and falsely

declared as the same good.

Source: Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department

Image 5. Ivory discovered in the September 6, 2015 seizure.Image 4. Boxes from the September 6, 2015 seizure.

Image 3. Ivory confiscated in the September 2, 2015 seizure. Source: Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department

Flying Under the Radar

Airports and Routes – Rhino Horn

Figure 29 maps all rhino horn trafficking routes recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database. 54, or 64%,

of the 85 seizures recorded in the Database contained sufficient information for inclusion in the rhino horn

routes map. There are 33 countries linked to rhino horn trafficking in the Database.

The rhino horn routes map shows a clear trend of movement from Southern Africa to East and Southeast

Asia. Southern Africa emerges as the most significant origin location, as criminal networks source rhino horn

from the largest remaining white rhino populations in South Africa, Namibia, Botswana, and Zimbabwe,

cxviii

but regularly move their contraband through airports in Mozambique. Rhino horn leaving Southern Africa

may transit through East Africa or the Middle East, or may travel directly from Maputo or Johannesburg to

Asian hubs in Bangkok, Hanoi, Hong Kong, and Beijing.

Like in the ivory routes map, East African and Middle Eastern hubs facilitate the movement of rhino horn from

its source to large demand markets. Jomo Kenyatta Airport in Nairobi appears in particular as a prominent

transit point. For example, the most utilized route in the rhino horn category of the Database is from Maputo

to Nairobi, with five separate instances of rhino horn trafficking. Alongside Nairobi, Middle Eastern (Doha,

Abu Dhabi, and Dubai) and European transit hubs (Paris) are the most important transit locations for rhino

horn – Doha alone counts 16 rhino horn trafficking flights. Flights from Paris have moved rhino horn to

Asian hubs like Shanghai, Beijing, and Hanoi. Some Asian airports also act as important transit locations;

for example, the second most common route is a flight from Bangkok to Hanoi in Vietnam, one of the most

prominent destination markets for rhino horn, with four flights counted in the Database.

The rhino horn trafficking routes map represents the flights used to traffic rhino horn products through the air transport

sector. This includes instances where the product did not actually enter a country because it was seized earlier in the

route. Each line represents one flight and the bubbles represent the total number of flights to and from each city.

Figure 29. Rhino horn trafficking routes by air recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database

Flying Under the Radar

Despite lower seizure numbers, rhino horn transit

routes reflect those for ivory to a large extent in

Figure 30. The Middle East and Greater Horn

of Africa again feature as transit points, with

Southeast and East Asian countries appearing

as destinations. Countries like France, Nigeria,

Uganda, and Ethiopia appear as origin countries,

but have small to nonexistent rhino populations.

This suggests that traffickers are moving horns

from source countries to these origin locations

before flying them to demand markets. In the

case of France, rhino horns are sometimes bought

at antique stores before leaving for more typical

markets in East Asia.

cxix

There are a number of significant differences

between the ivory and rhino horn transit graphs,

however. First, the origins of trafficking instances

have condensed from 33 countries in our ivory

data to just 17 countries in our rhino horn data.

Rather than a diverse array of African origin points, Figure 30 reveals that Mozambique and South Africa are

by far the most common origin locations for illicit rhino horn trafficked via the air transport sector, according

to the C4ADS Air Seizure Database. Second, although Vietnam is a prominent destination for both ivory

and rhino horn consignments, it is more significant as a destination point for rhino horn. Finally, Laos also

emerges as a prominent destination point.

Figure 31 displays the airports with the largest

numbers of seizures, using three seizures as a

baseline for inclusion. Of the 33 countries that

have had at least one instance of rhino horn

trafficking by air, 21 (62%) have seized rhino

horns. According to the Database, a large number

of rhino horn seizures tend to occur in origin

airports OR Tambo and Maputo; OR Tambo

in South Africa has made the most rhino horn

seizures, with 11 total seizures, followed by Maputo

Airport in Mozambique with 10. This may be

because rhino horn trafficking instances primarily

originate in either South Africa or Mozambique,

and are then dispersed across a much wider variety

of transit and destination ports. Still, destination

airports like Tan Son Nhat, Suvarnabhumi,

Beijing, Shanghai and Noi Bai have also seized

several shipments of rhino horn. Jomo Kenyatta is

the only primarily transit airport to stop three or

more rhino horn trafficking instances.

Ethiopia

Laos

Malaysia

Uganda

Nigeria

France

UAE

Kenya

Thailand

Qatar

South Africa

Vietnam

Mozambique

China

0 5 10 15 20 25

Trafficking Instance Count

Origin

Transit

Destination

Entebbe Airport

Hong Kong Airport

Shanghai Pudong Airport

Noi Bai Airport

Suvarnabhumi Airport

Beijing Capital Airport

Jomo Kenyatta Airport

Tan Son Nhat Airport

Maputo Airport

O.R. Tambo Airport

036 9 12

Seizure Count

Figure 31. Airport seizure count for airports with three or more rhino

horn seizures between January 2009 and August 2016

Figure 30. Country level flight route information for countries with

three or more rhino horn trafficking instances between January 2009

and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

Airports and Routes – Reptiles

The reptile routes map shows all reptile trafficking routes recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database.

195, or 75%, of the 259 seizures recorded in the Database contained sufficient information for inclusion.

With 73 total countries involved in at least one reptile trafficking instance, the reptile category is the most

geographically diverse of the four categories used in this report. Despite the diffuse geography of the reptile

trafficking instances in the Database, a majority of reptile trafficking appears to be concentrated in a few

Southern Asian countries, almost entirely due to the illegal trade of two endangered turtle species.

Southern Asia has by far the highest number of reptile trafficking instances. Many of these instances are part

of the trade in turtles moving from India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Pakistan to Thailand, Malaysia, and

Singapore. Turtles originating in Northern India and Bangladesh are generally destined for Bangkok, while

turtles smuggled from Southern India usually fly to Kuala Lumpur. Bangkok is associated with the highest

number of reptile trafficking flights in the Database, with 54 flights, 40 of which were destined for Bangkok,

and often originated in Madagascar. Kuala Lumpur is second with 38 flights, 30 of which were destined for

Kuala Lumpur, and eight of which left from the airport.

In contrast to the rhino horn or ivory routes maps, the reptile map shows a marked shift away from Africa.

The only African airports that appear prominently are Jomo Kenyatta Airport in Nairobi and Ivato Airport

in Madagascar. The route between Ivato and Jomo Kenyatta appears to be commonly used, however, with

seven different instances.

Europe appears as a prominent destination for reptiles originating in the Americas, Africa, and Asia. 17%

of reptile seizures within the Database were either destined for or transited through at least one European

country, compared to 9.9% in the other three categories of the C4ADS Air Seizure Database.

The reptile trafficking routes map represents the flights used to traffic reptiles through the air transport sector.

This includes instances where the product did not actually enter a country because it was seized earlier in the

route. Each line represents one flight and the bubbles represent the total number of flights to and from each city.

Figure 32. Reptile trafficking routes by air recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database

Flying Under the Radar

Figure 33 reveals that the animals arriving in European

hubs like London, Paris, Amsterdam, and Berlin come

from a wide variety of regions. For the most part,

however, seized reptiles destined for European pet

markets seem to primarily originate in the Americas,

followed by Southeast Asia and Africa.

The reptile routes data differs from ivory and rhino

horn in another important way: transit hubs appear

to be almost nonexistent. While ivory and rhino horn

trafficking instances are clearly consolidated in East

Africa, the Middle East, and Europe prior to export to

East Asia, reptile traffickers appear to rely much more

heavily on direct flights. While a circuitous route may

benefit ivory and rhino horn traffickers who prefer

to arrive from airports far from elephant and rhino

populations, direct flights help live reptile traffickers

evade multiple checkpoints and put less stress on the

reptiles themselves.

The importance of South and Southeast Asia to reptile trafficking is clearly displayed in Figure 33. Although

China still features prominently, particularly as a destination, the focus shifts south to India, Thailand,

Malaysia, and Indonesia. This region ranks highest in the data largely due to the trafficking of black pond

turtles and Indian star tortoises from India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Pakistan to Thailand, China, and

Malaysia, the three largest destinations for reptiles according to Figure 33.

Only three African countries seem to play prominent roles in the reptile trade, according to the C4ADS

Air Seizure Database: Madagascar, Sudan, and Kenya. Madagascar is a significant origin point for reptiles,

ranking only behind India in its role as an origin location. Sudan is a frequent origin for Nile crocodiles

destined for Dubai, and Kenya is the only primarily transit country identified by the data.

Unlike in the ivory and rhino horn routes maps,

where East Asia was the only dominant destination,

the UAE and Europe have shifted from primarily

transit locations to prominent destinations, largely

as a result of the pet trade in both regions. Russia,

Mexico, and the United States, largely absent from

both the ivory and rhino horn transit analyses,

appear as both origin and destination markets for

reptiles.

Figure 34 counts the number of reptile seizures

for airports with at least three seizures. Of the 73

countries involved in reptile trafficking, 48 (64%)

have made seizures. Four of the top 18 airports by

seizure numbers are Indian airports, accounting for

34 seizures. Thailand follows with 23 seizures in

Suvarnabhumi Airport alone. Taken together, the

Changi Airport

Heathrow Airport

Allama Iqbal Airport

Bengaluru Airport

Brussels Airport

Cochin Airport

Munich Airport

Shanghai Pudong Airport

Charles de Gaulle Airport

Kuala Lumpur Airport

Hong Kong Airport

Chhatrapati Shivaji Airport

Shahjalal Airport

Soekarno-Hatta Airport

Ivato Airport

Chennai Airport

Dubai Airport

Suvarnabhumi Airport

0 5 10 15 20

Seizure Count

France

Kenya

Netherlands

Russia

Singapore

Pakistan

United Kingdom

Japan

Sudan

Germany

USA

Mexico

Bangladesh

UAE

Madagascar

Indonesia

Malaysia

China

Thailand

India

0 20 40

Trafficking Instance Count

Origin

Transit

Destination

Figure 34. Airport seizure count for airports with three or more

reptile seizures between January 2009 and August 2016

Figure 33. Country level flight route information for countries

with six or more reptile trafficking instances between January

2009 and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

South and Southeast Asian regions represent 44% of the seizures within the reptile category. The remaining

56% of seizures are spread across East Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and Madagascar. With the exception

of Ivato Airport in Madagascar, no individual African or American airport has made three or more reptile

seizures according to the Database, even though Africa and the Americas have been involved in at least 49

and 29 reptile trafficking instances respectively. This disparity may be due to limited public reporting in

those jurisdictions on reptile seizures, lower awareness of reptile trafficking amongst African and American

enforcement agencies, poor training on wildlife trafficking, or, alternatively, enforcement in those areas could

be choosing to prioritize seizing other types of contraband.

Flying Under the Radar

Shifting Transit Routes, Narcotics, and Reptiles

Past interrogations of wildlife traffickers have revealed that smuggling networks monitor not only

enforcement levels within airports, but also the creation of new international transit routes, which

traffickers consider to be less risky. Some cases have shown that other criminal actors support wildlife

trafficking networks, or at the very least, search for the same enforcement loopholes. One seizure in 2015

revealed how different networks overlap, as well as how these networks adapt to and take advantage of

situational changes.

On September 27, 2015, officials at Tamil Nadu’s Madurai International Airport (India) seized a shipment

of 247 Indian star tortoises.

cxx

The suspect arrested in connection with the seizure admitted to authorities

that he had obtained the tortoises in Chennai, India, and was taking them to Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia

through Colombo, Sri Lanka.

cxxi

Although Indian star tortoises, listed on CITES Appendix II, are frequently trafficked in and around

India, Malaysia, and Sri Lanka, this was the first seizure of tortoises at the airport – most previous

seizures at Madurai Airport had been of either drugs or gold.

cxxii

Prior to this seizure, most illicit tortoise

trafficking instances in India had moved through Chennai, Chhatrapati Shivaji, Cochin, or Bengaluru

Airports. A district forest officer involved in the investigation suggested that the traffickers might have

chosen Madurai because the airport was adding new international routes at the time, and the airport

officials and staff were not familiar with wildlife smuggling.

cxxiii

A subsequent investigation revealed that

the suspect involved in the seizure had a history of smuggling drugs, including a hallucinogenic veterinary

drug Ketamine, but he insisted that this instance was his first experience transporting tortoises.

cxxiv

cxxv

This particular instance demonstrated how narcotics and wildlife smuggling networks operating within

India can intersect, as well as how different criminal networks adapt to take advantage of the same gaps

in certain airport’s screening capabilities. This suggests that a diverse array of illicit commodities may be

moved through the same international airports that are perceived as less risky, either due to enforcement

loopholes, a lack of capacity or awareness, corruption, or rapid expansion.

Image 6. Tortoise and narcotics trafficking suspect Abdul Alim and a few of the trafficked Indian star tortoises. Source: S. James

Flying Under the Radar

Airports and Routes – Birds

The bird routes map shows all bird trafficking routes recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database. 118, or

81%, of the 146 bird seizures recorded in the Database contained sufficient information for inclusion in our

analysis. There are 68 total countries linked to at least one bird trafficking instance, making the bird routes

data second only to the reptile routes data in terms of geographic diversity.

Unlike the ivory, rhino horn, and even reptile routes maps, there is no clear geographical flow associated with

international bird trafficking routes. However, three regions of interest do appear: the Americas, Europe, and

the Middle East. In contrast to ivory and rhino horn trafficking routes, the bird routes map reveals that Africa

and East Asia are the least relevant regions to bird trafficking, according to the Database. The only visible

pattern appears to be general movement from the Southern to the Northern Hemispheres, suggesting that

birds are moved from their natural habitats in South America and Southeast Asia to live pet markets in the

US, Europe, and the Middle East.

Of the three destination regions visible in Figure 35, the Middle East appears to be the most prominent.

Dubai was involved in 21 of the 130 flights recorded within the bird routes data, 13 more than the next most

prominent city, Sao Paulo in Brazil. The two most frequent routes associated with Dubai were Moscow and

Brussels to Dubai Airport. Still, each route was only counted twice, highlighting the diverse nature of bird

trafficking even in regards to its most significant airport.

The most common route overall, however, was from Georgetown, Guyana to New York City, with six total

instances. Each of these instances involved finches likely destined for singing competitions in Queens. Miami

and Los Angeles Airports are also common destinations for birds trafficked from Europe, South America,

and Asia.

Figure 35. Bird trafficking routes by air recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database

The bird trafficking routes map represents the flights used to traffic birds through the air transport sector. This

includes instances where the product did not actually enter a country because it was seized earlier in the route.

Each line represents one flight and the bubbles represent the total number of flights to and from each city.

Flying Under the Radar

The bird routes map is also unusual in comparison

to the other three maps in the high number of

domestic flights counted within the bird category.

For example, the majority of the routes associated

with Brazil and Russia are domestic flights.

Russian hawks and falcons seem to be flown

through Moscow before arrival in the Middle East

or Vladivostok Airport on the southeastern edge

of Russia.

Bird trafficking routes are similar to those for

reptiles in that trafficking route information is

extremely limited (Figure 36). The Americas,

Europe, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia

dominate as origin and destination locations. Africa

is entirely absent and China drops significantly,

out of the top three for the first time, and ties

with five other countries with six total trafficking

instances. Of all the prominent countries, only

nine have been listed as transit locations for past

trafficking instances. Of those nine transit countries, four are in Europe, and two are in Southeast Asia. The

four European countries – the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, and France – seem to serve partly as transit

points between South America and the Middle East.

The remaining three transit countries are the UAE, Brazil, and Russia. According to Figure 36, the UAE

is both the largest destination for birds and one of the largest transit countries. Brazil and Russia appear

as transit locations due to the large number of domestic flights counted within the bird category for each

country. Trafficked birds in both countries seem to funnel through airports in their largest cities, Sao Paulo

and Moscow, from smaller, domestic airports with limited or no international flights. As a result, Sao Paulo

and Moscow are often categorized as transit points, rather than origin points, for trafficking instances

originating in both countries.

Figure 37 displays the number of bird seizures made in

airports, using three seizures as a baseline for inclusion.

Out of the 68 countries involved in bird trafficking, 43

(63%) have made at least one seizure.

In line with its role as a major destination point for bird

trafficking, Dubai also leads by actual seizure numbers

(Figure 37). Russian and Vietnamese airports, despite

the high numbers of trafficking instances originating

in both countries, do not appear on the list of top

airports for seizures. This may indicate a failure in

enforcement, limited reporting, or a lack of awareness

of bird trafficking. American airports, by contrast,

together account for 12 seizures, and the second most

prominent country, Brazil, accounts for eight, which

may suggest better enforcement or reporting in those

Ben Gurion Airport

Brasilia Airport

Domodedovo Airport

JFK Airport

Simon Bolivar Airport

Abu Dhabi Airport

Jinnah Airport

Los Angeles Airport

Taiwan Taoyuan Airport

Miami Airport

Sao Paulo–Guarulhos Airport

Cheddi Jagan Airport

Soekarno-Hatta Airport

Dubai Airport

0510 15

Seizure Count

France

Singapore

Taiwan

Thailand

Venezuela

Australia

Italy

Bahrain

Belgium

China

Cuba

Qatar

Spain

United Kingdom

Mexico

Vietnam

Guyana

Indonesia

Pakistan

Russia

USA

Brazil

UAE

0 10 20

Trafficking Instance Count

Origin

Transit

Destination

Figure 37. Airport seizure count for airports with three or more

bird seizures between January 2009 and August 2016

Figure 36. Country level flight route information for countries with

four or more bird trafficking instances between January 2009 and

August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

countries. Cheddi Jagan Airport in Guyana ranks third in terms of seizures (Figure 37) and seventh in terms

of trafficking instances (Figure 36), which may imply that Guyana has been comparatively successful in

detecting illicit bird trafficking.

Finally, although Israel is not ranked as a prominent country for bird trafficking, it ties for fifth in terms of

the number of bird seizures made at Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv, and has seized 100% of known bird

trafficking instances within its borders. The inclusion of Ben Gurion Airport in Figure 37 suggests that

Israeli enforcement is particularly successful in identifying bird trafficking, despite Israel not being known as

a wildlife trafficking hotspot.

Flying Under the Radar

Modus Operandi

Tracking wildlife seizures over time reveals certain patterns in the various ways that traffickers move their

contraband through the air transport sector. Seizures reveal that traffickers often rely on the same methods

to move goods over time; for instance, tin foil has been used for years to hide ivory and other illicit products.

In other cases, traffickers’ modus operandi shift over time in response to heightened or changed enforcement

efforts, and to some extent, vary depending on the species or product being trafficked. Note that less effective

trafficking methods are more likely to be caught, and therefore included in our analysis, and that the most

effective tactics may never be identified. Still, understanding the various strategies that traffickers utilize,

frequently successfully, to evade detection will allow enforcement to develop better targeting mechanisms,

and can lead to substantially decreased vulnerability to trafficking within airports.

A crucial factor in intercepting wildlife traffickers and their contraband is knowing how it will be moved –

should enforcement be prepared for individual passengers carrying illegal products on their person? Should

private sector actors, such as airlines, be on the lookout as well, or does wildlife trafficking through the air

transport sector primarily affect national postal services? What obfuscation methods are most common and

easiest to detect? Wildlife trafficking cannot be addressed effectively without first answering these questions.

Conventional wisdom, particularly in regards to ivory trafficking, maintains that the majority of illicit wildlife

and wildlife products transported by air are moved by air cargo. This belief has led some in the transport

sector to argue that wildlife trafficking is a problem for cargo airlines to solve, and does not generally apply to

passenger airlines. C4ADS’ data suggests that this is not the case; trafficked wildlife was moved through air

freight – all air freight and cargo shipments – only 14% of the time. Luggage, or checked baggage, appears to be

Figure 38. Methods of transport for all trafficking instances in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database between January 2009 and August

2016

Flying Under the Radar

by far the most prominent category, accounting for 44% of the trafficking instances catalogued in C4ADS’

Air Seizure Database. The next largest category, unknown, reflects the same lack of detail that plagues all

wildlife seizure data and analyses; transport method is unknown for 37% of seizures.

It is possible that our transport method results reflect the success of screening methods for each transport

method. For example, luggage seizures could be high as a result of comparatively effective screening methods

for luggage, and air freight seizures could be low due to comparatively ineffective screening procedures for air

freight.

Transport method is more frequently reported for reptile and bird trafficking instances than either ivory or

rhino horn. This could be a result of the strange ways traffickers of these species move their contraband (e.g.

in their underwear), or it could reflect increased public interest in the fate of live trafficked animals.

Common Modus Operandi

The various modus operandi addressed in this section include:

• Obfuscation methods (tin or aluminum foil, paper, various agricultural products, etc.)

• Prominence of repeat offenders

• Abandoned or exchanged luggage

• Use of multiple suitcases

• Incorrect or incomplete customs declarations

• Circuitous air transit routes

• Use of shell or cover companies

• Custom clothing

• Taxidermy

• Use of ketamine and other drugs to sedate live animals

Other methods not covered in this section include:

• Falsification of CITES permits

• Collusion between customs officers and smugglers

• Collusion between industry employees and smugglers

Some wildlife trafficking methods are consistently used across all four categories, and extend even to other

contraband, like narcotics. For example, tin or aluminum foil is believed to prevent X-ray scanners from

producing clear images, and as a result is used to obfuscate ivory, rhino horn, weapons, ammunition, etc.

cxxvi

Live birds have even been found wrapped in tin foil and stuffed inside suitcases. In one instance at Changi

Airport in Singapore, officials discovered three white-rumped shamas along with six melodious laughing

thrushes (CITES Appendix II) inside one man’s suitcase.

cxxvii

The birds had been stuffed inside cylindrical

tubes, wrapped in aluminum foil, and stored inside black trash bags.

cxxviii

None of the birds survived.

Flying Under the Radar

Plastic wrap and tape are also frequently used, particularly for live animals like turtles, whose movement is

often restrained to prevent detection.

In 2013, Royal Thai Customs arrested a Thai man as he attempted to collect a suitcase containing 54

ploughshare tortoises and 21 radiated tortoises (both CITES Appendix I).

cxxix

The bag was the property of a

woman who had flown from Madagascar to Bangkok through Nairobi, and was not the property of the Thai

man who collected it.

cxxx

Further investigation revealed that the Thai suspect had previously been arrested

for wildlife trafficking.

cxxxi

This instance displays a number of the hallmarks of organized wildlife trafficking:

the reptiles were taped and hidden in checked luggage; the suitcase belonged to another individual, but was

abandoned at the destination by its owner for pickup by someone else; and the Thai man arrested was a repeat

offender.

Image 7. Ploughshare and radiated tortoises (both CITES Appendix I) discovered in a suitcase at Suvarnabhumi Airport in Bangkok,

Thailand. The tortoises were wrapped in tape to obstruct their movement. Source: P. Tansom/TRAFFIC

cxxxii

The sheer volume of air passengers and cargo that pass through large airports every day creates a substantial

enforcement challenge – the real world equivalent of finding a needle in a haystack. Faced with such a

task, customs and enforcement prioritize safety concerns, followed by technically ‘higher-level’ crimes, like

narcotics trafficking. Wildlife traffickers know they will not likely be targeted, and even if they are caught,

they may not be detained.

In one high profile ivory seizure in Zurich Airport in July 2015, three Chinese citizens were caught trafficking

262 kilograms of ivory, and one kilogram of lion products, in their luggage. The suspects were planning on

traveling from Tanzania, through Switzerland, to Beijing, China. The ivory had been wrapped in paper and

aluminum foil before being placed in suitcases. Zurich Airport Customs Chief Heinz Widmer told reporters,

“We started to search the passengers, and…we found in the system that three Chinese people are traveling

together and they have in total eight suitcases.”

cxxxiii

The unusually high number of suitcases led the officials to

detain the suspects “temporarily.”

cxxxiv

Each suspect was reportedly asked to pay a fine of $102,000, although

they were allegedly unable to pay such a high fine on the spot, and negotiated fines of “a lesser, undisclosed

Flying Under the Radar

amount of money” before their release later that day.

cxxxv

The three suspects were last reported to be safely

at home in China, despite the initiation of a criminal investigation into the incident in Tanzania.

cxxxvi

Wildlife traffickers are frequently identified as repeat offenders. The following list chronicles only a few of

many trafficking instances involving repeat offenders:

• In 2010, an airline passenger refused to open his bags as he went through security screening. The

Brazilian Federal Police were summoned and discovered 232 birds in his luggage. The suspect had

two previous wildlife offenses.

cxxxvii

• In 2013, 8.77 kilograms of ivory were discovered in Shenyang Xintai Airport in China. The suspect

involved in the case had traveled from Kenya through Seoul, South Korea. The suspect had smuggled

ivory from Kenya to China six times in one year at the time of his arrest.

cxxxviii

• A 2015 seizure of 200 Indian star tortoises (CITES Appendix II) resulted in two arrests. The suspects

identified one “Dinesh Jothimani” as the organizer of the trafficking attempt, making this the fourth

seizure linked to Jothimani.

cxxxix

Both the white-rumped shamas case and the Zurich ivory seizure case discussed above highlight two commonly

used trafficking methods: the abandonment of a suitcase somewhere along the chain by its original carrier,

and the use of multiple suitcases per person. The latter approach will be explored in more detail below in

regards to ivory trafficking.

Image 8. 232 saffron finches and double-collared seedeaters discovered in Brasilia Airport in 2010. The trafficker moving the

animals had two previous wildlife offenses. Source: Reprodução/Ibama

cxl

Searching for examples of abandoned or exchanged luggage will yield plentiful results, including:

• Black pond turtles discovered in four suitcases abandoned by their owners on the way from India to

Bangkok in 2014.

cxli

• Indian narrow-headed soft-shelled turtles (CITES Appendix I/II) found in a large bag abandoned in

Hazrat Shahjalal Airport in Bangladesh.

cxlii

• 270 birds that had been packed in luggage and exchanged from one trafficker to the next in Eduardo

Gomes Airport in Sao Paulo in 2011.

cxliii

• Nine rhino horns discovered in a suitcase in Bangkok in 2014 after the trafficker purposefully left his

Flying Under the Radar

bag behind so that it would follow him as lost luggage.

cxliv

• 110 kilograms of ivory packed in two suitcases and abandoned in Heathrow Airport when the

associated Vietnamese traffickers bought tickets back to Angola rather than continue on to their

destination.

cxlv

Increased knowledge of this and other common trafficking methods can inform and direct customs,

enforcement, and private sector action in airports, particularly those with a substantial trafficking problem but

little visibility on the issue. Detailed seizure data can reveal shifting trafficking trends and methodologies as

traffickers become aware of heightened and targeted enforcement action in specific ports. In fact, past seizure

information, limited though it may be, clearly shows enforcement-driven changes in trafficking patterns.

In one 2015 seizure, the Indian Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) seized 72 black pond turtles from

two smugglers in Kempegowda Airport, India.

cxlvi

The suspects had taped the turtles’ legs together, covered

them in cardboard and pillow covers, and placed them in two suitcases.

cxlvii

Although the smugglers were

originally planning on moving the animals from Chennai to Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia, they were instructed

to use Kempegowda Airport instead of Chennai, since “security was heightened at the Chennai airport.”

cxlviii

In other instances, networks have shifted from carrying contraband on their persons

cxlix

to removing the

contraband and stowing it in their carry-on bags prior to security screenings in response to enforcement

pressure.

Tracking these sorts of changes over time can help officials become as versatile as the traffickers

they work to stop.

Flying Under the Radar

Modus Operandi – Ivory

The above graph separates all of the ivory seizures within the C4ADS Air Seizure Database by transport

method. Although the press frequently reports the details of ivory seizures, 49% of the ivory seizures in the

Database did not have associated transport method information. By comparison, reptile and bird seizures

in the Database included transport method information for around 75% of instances. Of all the categories

reviewed in this report, ivory traffickers seemed to most heavily rely on air freight, although air freight

shipments still only represented 17% of the total ivory trafficking instances.

Because of ivory tusks’ large size, traffickers are rarely able to transport raw ivory in their carry-on baggage. In

addition, ivory’s high value allows traffickers to ship large ivory consignments by air freight, one of the most

expensive options for air transport. Air freight shipments, however, require a fair amount of documentation,

such as an air waybill, that list the shipper and consignees of the shipment, as well as the products shipped

and a number of other details. Ivory traffickers must therefore falsify the information included on air waybills

and any other required documentation to evade detection. Smugglers frequently declare ivory as bulk low-

value goods, such as ‘plastic scrap,’ technological parts and pieces, ‘decorative tiles,’ and a wide variety of

agricultural products, such as avocados and beans. In order to throw off trained sniffer dogs, traffickers often

package illicit goods with products like pepper, dried fish, or garlic.

cli

Traffickers may also list nonexistent

or defunct companies as the shipper and consignee, including fake addresses and phone numbers, to ensure

that enforcement agencies will not be able to easily identify the true source and destination of a shipment in

case of a seizure.

Modus operandi utilized by ivory traffickers have included:

• Aluminum or tin foil, paper, plastic, or cloth as obfuscation method

Figure 39. Methods of transport for ivory trafficking instances by air between January 2009 and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

• Abandonment or exchange of luggage

• Additional luggage

• Custom clothing

• Shell or front companies

• Circuitous transit routes

• Missing, incomplete, or fraudulent customs documentation

Ivory is sometimes trafficked along with:

• Rhino horn

• Pangolin or pangolin scales

• Lion teeth and/or claws

• Leopard skins

• Mammoth ivory

The following case studies describe a number of other common trafficking strategies, including the use of

custom-made clothing, continued use of the same transit routes, and fraudulent documentation. Compiling

detailed information on wildlife traffickers’ smuggling strategies provides customs and enforcement with

clear red-flag indicators that can help to target high-risk passengers and shipments, thereby improving

enforcement’s success rate.

Flying Under the Radar

Handmade Vests in Hong Kong

An ongoing trafficking trend in Hong Kong highlights smugglers’ repeated use of certain routes and

modus operandi. On August 7, 2015, Hong Kong Customs stopped one 18-year-old man arriving in

Hong Kong Airport from Harare Airport, Zimbabwe via Dubai Airport.

clii

He was wearing a tailor-made

vest containing 15 kilograms of worked ivory at the time of his arrest.

cliii

A little over two weeks later, a

42-year-old man was arrested after arrival in Hong Kong Airport with 15 kilograms of worked ivory.

cliv

He had hidden the ivory in a tailor-made vest as well, but had stowed the vest in his hand baggage prior

to his arrest.

clv

Although he also transited through Dubai Airport, he was traveling from Abuja, Nigeria

(likely Nnamdi Azikiwe Airport).

clvi

The seizures seemed to match another 15-kilogram seizure from July

of that year, although the suspect in that case originated in Lagos, rather than Abuja, and carried ivory in

his pants as well as a hand-made vest.

clvii

Since then, an additional eight individuals have been arrested under similar circumstances in Hong Kong

Airport prior to September 2016. Each instance generally matches the following description:

• Transit route of Abuja, Nigeria or Harare, Zimbabwe*

clviii

to Dubai, UAE to Hong Kong

• Tailor-made vest

• About 15 kilograms of ivory per suspect

• One or two vests per male suspect

The suspects have not been found wearing the vests since the incident on August 7th. Instead, the

vests are almost always discovered in their carry-on baggage. Ivory has also been found in the suspects’

underwear, pants, and backpacks. No other seizures using similar vests have been publicly reported in

Nigeria, Zimbabwe, or the United Arab Emirates. Although this report only focuses on events occurring

between 2009 and August 2016, it is worth noting that multiple seizures made in October 2016 suggest

that this trend is ongoing.

In this particular case, enforcement in Hong Kong have made multiple arrests, and yet the trend

continues, suggesting that Hong Kong authorities may be missing enough of these instances to warrant

the continued use of this strategy.

* One seizure made on April 17, 2016 matched the modus operandi of the other seizures, but originated

in Abidjan, Ivory Coast.

clix

Source: Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department

The first vest is similar to the vests used in the earlier seizures, while the second vest more closely resembles those used in later

seizures. Source: Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department

Image 12. Vest seized on November 7, 2015 in Hong Kong.Image 11. Vest seized on November 7, 2015 in Hong Kong.

Image 10. Vest seized on August 24, 2015.Image 9. Vest seized on August 7, 2015.

Flying Under the Radar

Fraudulent Documentation

Ivory consignments shipped in air freight generally share a number of the same characteristics; for

example, they are often declared as low-value bulk goods and destined for defunct or nonexistent

companies.

In July of 2012, Thai officials opened six crates declared as “handicrafts” as part of a routine search

and discovered 158 raw ivory tusks weighing 456 kilograms.

clx

The ensuing investigation revealed that

the consignment had left Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo and transited through Jomo

Kenyatta Airport in Nairobi before reaching its destination in Bangkok.

clxi

The Kenya Wildlife Service

(KWS) and Suvarnabhumi Airport’s Cargo Clearing Customs Bureau reported that the consignee listed

on the shipment’s air waybill was one Johnson Controls Air Express in Thailand.

clxii

Transit information associated with the consignment’s air waybill number reveal that the ivory was

shipped on two Kenya Airways flights, KQ550 and KQ886, on July 12th. Soon after the seizure,

media outlets began reporting that “Johnson Controls Air Express” was not a real company.

clxiii

Thai

documentation for the company does not appear to exist.

In another case in May 2011, Kenyan authorities discovered 1.4 tons of ivory abandoned at the “import

cargo section” of Jomo Kenyatta Airport, although the shipment was destined for export to Lagos,

Nigeria.

clxiv

The ivory had been packaged in metal boxes smeared with pepper.

clxv

Airport officials

revealed that paperwork associated with the consignment claimed that the boxes had originated in the

“Embassy of the Republic of Papua, New Guinea” and the “Embassy of Brunei” in Nairobi.

clxvi

Officials

soon discovered that neither embassy existed in Nairobi, even though addresses had been listed on the

air waybill for both.

clxvii

The shipment was destined for “Roadside Ventures Ltd.” in Nigeria,

clxviii

but may

have been intended for Roadside Ventures (Express) Ltd., a freight forwarding and customs clearance

company based in Lagos. It is also possible that the name “Roadside Ventures” was used to distract from

the real destination of the shipment.

A little over a year later, sniffer dogs at Jomo Kenyatta Airport discovered a 745-kilogram shipment of

ivory.

clxix

According to reports, the shipment had been declared as ‘motor vehicle spare parts,’ was packed

in crates, sprayed with pepper, and covered with aluminum foil.

clxx

The shipment was also destined for

Lagos, Nigeria,

clxxi

although enforcement did not publicly release more detailed information.

Image 14. Air waybill information for the July 2012 air freight shipment. Source: track-trace.com.

Image 13. Officials open one of the six boxes involved in the seizure. The box reads, “Republic of South Africa.”

Flying Under the Radar

Modus Operandi – Rhino Horn

Figure 40 divides the rhino horn seizures within the C4ADS Air Seizure Database by transport method, and

reveals that the modus operandi of rhino horn traffickers most closely matches that of ivory traffickers. Like

ivory, unknown trafficking methods account for around half of rhino horn trafficking instances. Luggage and

air freight appear to be the most common ways that both rhino horn and ivory are moved, although luggage

is 5% more common for rhino horn seizures within the Database. There is one striking difference, however;

according to our data, rhino horn is rarely smuggled on a person’s body or in their carry-on luggage, likely

due to their unwieldy size and shape. Note that it is possible that traffickers are also moving rhino horn

powder through airport security in their carry-on baggage, although it seems that if this is the case, they are

not getting caught.

Modus operandi utilized by rhino horn traffickers have included:

• Aluminum or tin foil, paper, plastic, or cloth as obfuscation method

• Abandonment or exchange of luggage

• Additional luggage

• Shell or front companies

• Circuitous transit route

• Missing, incomplete, or fraudulent customs documentation

• Taxidermy

Figure 40. Methods of transport for rhino horn trafficking instances by air between January 2009 and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

Rhino horn is sometimes trafficked along with:

• Ivory

• Pangolin or pangolin scales

• Lion teeth and/or claws

• Leopard skins

• Mammoth ivory

Unlike live animal traffickers, who benefit most from direct flights, rhino horn traffickers have been known

to send or take their contraband on circuitous routes through airports they suspect will not be on the lookout

for rhino horn. For instance, one Vietnamese individual carrying eight black rhino horns flew from Maputo,

Mozambique to Vietnam via Entebbe Airport, Uganda; Dubai Airport, UAE; Changi Airport, Singapore;

and Laos.

clxxii

He was finally stopped in Singapore with 21.5 kilograms of rhino horn in his checked baggage,

and eventually sentenced to 15 months in prison.

Rhino horn traffickers are also able to exploit legal loopholes for the import and export of taxidermy to

smuggle rhino horn. Poachers and traffickers in the well-known Xaysavang Network, for instance, would

take horns from poached rhinos to taxidermists to have them mounted as hunting trophies so that they

could be exported. A former member of the network allegedly told South African police, “The trophy is just

a cover for getting the horn out of South Africa and into Asia. Once in Asia, it obviously would enter the

black market as rhino horn for ‘medicinal purposes’.”

clxxiii

Flying Under the Radar

Indirect Transit Route and ‘Lost’ Luggage

Traffickers often go to great lengths to separate themselves from their illegal cargo, even when they pack

their contraband in their own suitcases.

In one case from January 2014, customs officials at Bangkok’s Suvarnabhumi Airport seized nine rhino

horns weighing 21.8 kilograms from a lost suitcase.

clxxiv

After investigation, the officials discovered

that a Vietnamese national had purposefully left the suitcase behind so that it would follow him as

lost luggage. The horns were in transit from Nairobi to Hanoi at the time of their seizure, and had

reportedly passed through at least one other airport prior to arrival in Nairobi.

South African Taxidermy

Other South African trafficking networks have utilized, and likely continue to utilize, taxidermists to

ensure the safe passage of rhino horn and other products. In one instance in December of 2015, the

South African Revenue Service (SARS) discovered two horns weighing over 10 kilograms at OR Tambo

Airport in Johannesburg.

clxxv

According to a SARS press release, “Customs officials found the horn

in a shipment of taxidermy that had been profiled for examination at a well-known cargo forwarding

company.”

clxxvi

SARS reported that the cargo forwarding company then contacted the owner of the shipment to request

the required export documentation for the rhino horns, but did not received a response within the

necessary timeframe.

clxxvii

The horns were confiscated as a result.

Trafficking networks have also been known to use this same method to transport ivory from Southern

Africa to Asia,

clxxviii

as well as wildlife products from Africa to the US.

clxxix

Image 15. Nine rhino horns discovered in the “lost” suitcase. © Royal Thai Customs

Flying Under the Radar

Modus Operandi – Reptiles

The above graph demonstrates the different transport methods used for all of the reptile seizures contained

within the C4ADS Air Seizure Database. According to Figure 41, reptile traffickers appear to rely on luggage

far more than any other method. Numbers of air freight shipments and passenger trafficking instances more

closely resemble the transport breakdown for ivory (17% and 4% respectively). Close to a quarter of reptile

seizures contained within the Database lack transport method information entirely. Despite these unknowns,

the reptile dataset is the most complete of the four categories covered in this report, with a total of 77% of

reptile seizures’ transport methods accounted for (compared to 51%, 46%, and 74% for ivory, rhino horn,

and birds respectively).

Luggage appears to be the preferred method of reptile traffickers for a variety of reasons. Most turtle species

can be easily packaged by the dozens in a standard suitcase. Hardier than birds, some turtle and other reptile

species can go without food or water for up to ten days, and therefore give smugglers more flexibility to choose

the most advantageous trafficking method available. These species’ durability allows traffickers to travel with

their contraband to their destination; abandon their luggage at some point along the transit route; send the

animals along a more circuitous transit route than usually used for live animals; or leave their suitcase for an

extended period of time in an airport’s baggage claim, with the knowledge that they can either retrieve the

suitcase later or hope the airline will transport the luggage directly to the trafficker’s declared address.

Modus operandi utilized by reptile traffickers have included:

• Tape, plastic, or cloth as obfuscation method

• Abandonment or exchange of luggage

Figure 41. Methods of transport for reptile trafficking instances by air between January 2009 and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

• Additional luggage

• Missing, incomplete, or fraudulent customs documentation

• Fraudulent paperwork claiming the animals are captive-bred

• Use of sedatives to inhibit animals’ movements

Reptiles are sometimes trafficked along with:

• Narcotics

• Arachnids

• Insects

To ensure the safe passage of their illicit cargo, traffickers frequently tape the animals or wrap them in

plastic to restrict their movement. In one instance in May 2016, 60 Egyptian cobras were discovered in two

polystyrene boxes in Cairo Airport. An official detected suspicious movements within the boxes during an

X-ray. The snakes were discovered packed in ice to limit their movements, and with their mouths sewn shut

with surgical thread, presumably to protect the traffickers and prevent the snakes from biting each other or

hissing during transit.

Image 16. Six of the cobras seized in Cairo in May 2016 with their mouths sewn shut. Source: IFAW

clxxx

In other recent cases, reptile traffickers appear to be increasingly relying on prescription and veterinary drugs

to keep their contraband subdued during their journey. During a two-day workshop held by WWF-Pakistan,

Syed Mahmood Nasir, the Pakistani Inspector General of Forests in the Ministry of Climate Change, noted

the importance of tracking smugglers’ shifting strategies to effectively tackle the wildlife trade, and cited a

Flying Under the Radar

recent seizure of 144 anesthetized black pond turtles in Lahore Airport as evidence of a change in trafficking

methods.

clxxxi

A case from April 2014 displayed a number of the hallmarks of this apparent trend in South

Asia – an airline employee found “what they thought to be mangoes” packed tightly in the check-in baggage

of Abdul Harish, who was on his way from Trivandrum Airport, India to Bangkok through Colombo, Sri

Lanka.

clxxxii

Customs officials detained Harish when they found him to be “extremely edgy” during customs

clearance.

clxxxiii

Officials eventually discovered 460 Indian star tortoise hatchlings (CITES Appendix II)

crammed in Harish’s suitcase. The turtles had been “drugged and immobilized after being dipped in a

sleeping pill solution.”

clxxxiv

Local news outlets later reported that Harish was already listed as a ‘sensitive’

traveler by the Immigration Department at the time of the seizure.

clxxxv

Image 17. Some of the Indian star tortoise hatchlings discovered in the luggage of Abdul Harish. Soure: The Hindu

clxxxvi

Many other reptile trafficking incidents, particularly in the South Asian region, display similarities to the

Trivandrum seizure: the animals are tightly packaged in check-in luggage, drugged to restrain their movement,

and moved by a criminal suspect, if not a repeat offender. In some cases, seasoned drug mules have even been

used to move reptiles instead of, or packaged with, their usual narcotics.

clxxxvii

Some recent seizures suggest

that Ketamine, a veterinary drug popular for its hallucinogenic tranquilizing properties as well as the “most

commonly used drug in wildlife immobilization,”

clxxxviii clxxxix

may be increasingly used by wildlife traffickers to

sedate reptiles and other animals (see Shifting Transit Routes, Narcotics, and Reptiles).

cxc

Flying Under the Radar

Repeat Offenders

The low penalties and comparatively limited attention paid to wildlife trafficking crimes allow wildlife

traffickers to continue their operations more or less unimpeded, despite past wildlife smuggling offenses.

In the fall of 2010, Malaysian officials in Kuala Lumpur Airport discovered 95 boa constrictors, two

rhinoceros vipers, and a matamata turtle in the luggage of a man named Wong Keng Liang (“Anson”

Wong) after his suitcase broke open on a luggage conveyor belt.

cxci

He was only charged with smuggling

the boa constrictors, as the other species were not endangered.

cxcii

A full decade previously, Wong, or the “Lizard King”, had been at the center of an animal-smuggling ring

that had reportedly trafficked and sold over 300 protected Asian and African reptiles.

cxciii

After a five-

year investigation involving authorities in five countries, US agents eventually arrested him in Mexico

City Airport in 1998.

cxciv

In 2001, he was sentenced to 71 months in jail, a $60,000 fine, and a three-

year ban from selling animals in the US, even though he had pled guilty to crimes carrying maximum

penalties of 250 years in prison and a $12.5-million fine.

cxcv

After his 2010 arrest, Wong was sentenced to five years in jail for smuggling the endangered boas, but

was released in February 2012 after serving only 17 months.

cxcvii

In 2015, a documentary by journalist

Steve Chao revealed that Wong continues to trade endangered reptile species, including endangered

ploughshare tortoises from Madagascar, out of Penang, Malaysia.

cxcviii

Image 18: Anson Wong

Flying Under the Radar

Lizards & Germany

While India and its surrounding nations remain the epicenter of turtle and tortoise trafficking, Germany

is a prominent destination for illegally trafficked lizards. A 2015 article by The Guardian focused on a

large reptile trade fair in Hamm, Germany and highlighted just how lucrative the illicit reptile trade

had become there.

cxcix

The article pointed to one large loophole: “...while collecting species in the wild

and exporting them is illegal in their countries of origin, they may be freely bought and sold in Europe

without a crime being committed – and no extradition treaties apply.”

This loophole would be in

prominent display at fairs like the one The Guardian covered, except for one convenient policy – the

organizers ban photography.

cci

One trader in particular at the Hamm fair has been linked to reptile trafficking. On September 9th,

2014, Costa Rican officials at the Juan Santamaría International Airport noticed Maciej Oskroba

“behaving suspiciously” and “repeatedly adjusting his bag.”

ccii

cciii

A search of his luggage revealed “184

frogs, 42 lizards, nine snakes and 203 tadpoles – all in plastic food containers stuffed with leaves.”

cciv

According to media reports, Oskroba was taking the animals to Dusseldorf, Germany through Panama.

ccv

Despite facing a potential fine of “40 times a monthly salary” or three years in prison, Oskroba was

deported from Costa Rica about a week later.

ccvi

ccvii

A Facebook page for a ‘Maciej Oskroba’ lists information for a website, www.RARE-HERPS.de. The

website contains contact information for Oskroba, as well as a list of reptiles apparently for sale. One

page on the site states, in German, “Please use the contact function listed below to inquire about the

species listed.” The website mentions such species as the Abronia graminea, or the terrestrial arboreal

alligator lizard, which is given ‘Special Protection’ under Mexican law, and the Varanus prasinus, or

emerald monitor lizard, which is listed on CITES Appendix II and is protected in its home territory of

Indonesian New Guinea. The site also lists the Varanus acanthurus, or northern blunt-spined monitor

lizard, which is illegal to export from Australia, the only place where it lives in the wild.

Image 20. An image of snakes in their containers posted by RARE-HERPS is similar to an image of reptiles trafficked by

Oskroba in 2014. Source: Facebook.

Image 19. The animals seized from Maciej Oskroba on September 9, 2014. Source: Costa Rican Public Security Ministry.

Flying Under the Radar

One photo posted on RARE-HERPS’s Facebook page showcases a stack of approved CITES permits

alongside the comment, “A lot of nice animals can finally move to Japan and the United Staates [sic].

Cites approved. NonCites will complete the shipments.”

Another post on the page mentions RARE-HERPS’s reliance on flights. The accompanying photo

depicts a cargo parcel on the ground in front of Lufthansa Cargo – the photo itself is tagged to Lufthansa

Animal Lounge. The comment on the photo seems to reveal the destinations of and species included in

the company’s most recent air shipments, and mentions the arrival of new inventory.

After the Costa Rican seizure in 2014, Edwin Retana, a prosecutor with the Alajuela Flagrancy Court,

told the Tico Times, “These cases are very rare. But most similar cases would turn out exactly the same

way.”

ccviii

Rafael Gutiérrez, an official with Costa Rica’s National Parks Service, added, “We don’t see it

that often. But then again, maybe people just don’t get caught.”

ccix

Image 22. A package waits outside of Lufthansa Cargo’s Animal Lounge. Source: Facebook.

Image 21. A stack of CITES permits posted to RARE-HERPS’s Facebook page. Source: Facebook

Flying Under the Radar

Modus Operandi — Birds

Figure 42 displays the different transport methods used by bird traffickers, according to C4ADS Air Seizure

Database. Figure 48 reveals that birds are found hidden on a trafficker’s person or in a trafficker’s carry-on

luggage 15% of the time, compared to 4%, 0%, and 4% for the other categories. Bird traffickers are the least

likely to use air freight, with only 10% of trafficking instances utilizing this option. Luggage remains by far

the most common trafficking method. The bird data was the second most complete category of the four, with

74% of seizures’ transport methods reported, compared to 77% for reptiles.

Bird traffickers’ reliance on carry-on luggage and clothing is likely due to the delicate nature of most bird

species. Unlike some reptiles, birds will not survive if left tightly packed in a suitcase for days at a time. They

also tend to be more susceptible to changes in temperature, so it may be comparatively less risky for a trafficker

to carry birds with them into the climate-controlled cabin of a plane than to leave them unsupervised in the

luggage compartment.

Modus operandi utilized by bird traffickers have included:

• Cloth, hair curlers, plastic bottles, or tape to prevent movement and/or noise

• Custom-made clothing

• Abandonment or exchange of luggage

• Missing, incomplete, or fraudulent customs or health documentation

• Fraudulent paperwork claiming the animals are captive-bred

• Use of sedatives to inhibit animals’ movements

Figure 42. Methods of transport for bird trafficking instances by air between January 2009 and August 2016

Flying Under the Radar

Birds are sometimes trafficked along with:

• Primates

• Reptiles

Transport methods for birds are otherwise fairly similar to those for reptiles. When traffickers choose to

transport birds by checked baggage, they, like reptile traffickers, attempt to prevent the animals from moving

or making noise. One trafficker attempting to move 66 birds through Ignacio Agramonte Airport, Cuba to

the United States attempted to keep the birds quiet by sealing their beaks shut.

ccx

Customs officials stopped

him after noticing suspicious bulges in his pants.

ccxi

A number of bird seizures have directly resulted from

traffickers failing to keep their contraband still and quiet. In one 2012 case, 35 birds were discovered in a

suitcase after airport security heard noise emanating from the bag and could see it moving slightly.

ccxii

Some smugglers resort to riskier means to try to keep the birds quiet. In one seizure made in Malta Airport

in November 2009, a Libyan man was found with 200 sedated canaries in his jacket and bag on his way to

Tripoli.

ccxiii

According to Mario Spiteri, the Animal Welfare Department Director for Malta, “They were

sedated with what smelt like lighter liquid” and a number of the birds had already died.

ccxiv

A spokesman

for Malta Airport reportedly told the press that airport security and enforcement officials were discovering

similar cases about twice a week.

ccxv

Image 23. Some of the canaries discovered in Malta Airport in 2009. Source: Times of Malta

ccxvi

Illegal bird trafficking presents an unusual danger to officials and industry personnel compared to ivory, rhino

horn, and reptile smuggling. Trafficked birds generally do not go through the required health screenings and

precautions necessary for legal bird shipments.

Flying Under the Radar

The H5N1 Virus

Despite the danger involved in smuggling potentially ill birds, trafficking incidents involving the H5N1

virus and other illnesses seem fairly common.

In July of 2012, Taiwanese authorities seized 38 pet birds that had been smuggled into the country from

southern China.

ccxvii

The animals tested positive for the fatal H5N1 bird flu virus.

ccxviii

The birds were

discovered in Taoyuan Airport in the carry-on luggage of a trafficker who claimed he had bought the

birds in Guangzhou, China on his way back from Macau.

ccxix

According to the Deputy Director-General

of the Taiwanese Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Chou Jih-haw, “This marks the

third time the virus has been detected at the country’s borders.”

ccxx

After the seizure, all 38 birds were

destroyed, and the smuggler and eight other people were monitored for signs of the disease.

ccxxi

About a year later, 60 parrots and birds-of-paradise (CITES Appendix II) were discovered by sniffer dogs

in Vienna Airport, Austria.

ccxxii

Over half of the birds had died in transit, and one tested positive for

the H5N1 avian flu virus, a disease with a mortality rate of 60% amongst humans.

ccxxiii

39 of the birds

were dead at the time of the seizure, and the 21 surviving birds were put down as a precaution.

ccxxiv

The

traffickers involved in the case, both from the Czech Republic, were set free to await trial.

ccxxv

The frequency of these cases suggests that the judicial penalties for trafficking sick birds, even combined

with the risk of serious illness, are not sufficient to deter bird traffickers.

Flying Under the Radar

Custom-made Clothing

Custom-made clothing seizures are fairly common – birds have been discovered in passengers’ altered

tights and leggings in Australia and the US, a specially made vest in Australia, socks in the United

Kingdom, in socks taped to a passenger’s arms and legs in the US, etc.

ccxxvi

ccxxvii

ccxxviii

ccxxix

ccxxx

Many of the

suspects caught using custom-made clothing to smuggle birds have been repeat offenders. In one instance

on May 9, 2010, customs officials in Cayenne Airport, French Guiana, stopped a Dutch tourist passing

through security with a strange mass at his waist.

ccxxxi

Upon further inspection, officials found a specially

made pocket sewed into the suspect’s pants that was designed to carry 16 hummingbirds.

ccxxxii

The birds had been wrapped tightly in cloth, taped, and inserted into separate pockets.

He was sentenced to six months in prison, five suspended sentences, and a criminal fine of €6,000.

ccxxxiii

Officials later discovered that the suspect had been arrested in 2008 while carrying 53 hummingbirds.

ccxxxiv

Image 24. The custom-made pouch discovered sewed into a trafficker’s pants. Source: Carina Francuske Guyana.

Image 25. Some of the birds retrieved from the suspect’s pants. Source: Carina Francuske Guyana.

Flying Under the Radar

Conclusions

Wildlife trafficking is a global problem that takes advantage of enforcement loopholes, lack of awareness,

limited public and private sector coordination, capacity gaps, and lagging technology and procedures to move

illicit products through the licit transportation system. As international travel continues to exponentially

increase, particularly in the air transport sector, enforcement and the private sector should make immediate

changes to better stem the international flow of illicit wildlife. Without such changes, wildlife traffickers

will continue to find the illegal wildlife trade a profitable, comparatively easy, and low-risk enterprise, at

substantial detriment to ecosystems, economies, and global security.

In Flying Under the Radar, we find that ivory, rhino horn, reptile, and bird traffickers seem to frequently use

large hub airports, and often exploit the same vulnerabilities within the air transport sector. Given the diverse

trafficking methods used by ivory, rhino horn, reptile, and bird traffickers, we are prevented from making

further general conclusions about wildlife trafficking by air. Instead, we provide brief overviews of our main

findings for each category below.

Ivory

Trend s

Between January 2009 and August 2016, ivory seizure numbers seemed to substantially increase. To a large

extent, this growth is likely reflecting a corresponding increase in reporting on and interest in ivory seizures

all over the world. It is unclear to what degree the increase indicates an increase in enforcement effectiveness

and attention to ivory trafficking, although this likely had an impact as well.

Over the same period, the number of large-scale ivory seizures made each year more or less remained the

same, while medium-scale ivory seizures increased slightly.

Routes

The ivory trafficking routes within the C4ADS Air Seizure Database reflect a clear Africa to Asia flow; ivory

seems to be funneled through hub airports in East Africa and the Middle East prior to arrival at large Asian

airports. In some instances, European hubs are used by ivory traffickers as alternate transit points. Although

many enforcement agencies are prevented from screening passengers and shipments in transit, to the extent

possible, targeting hubs in transit regions will help to stem the flow of ivory through airports.

Modus Operandi

We find that ivory is most often moved in checked luggage, followed by air freight. Ivory traffickers also seem

to use specific trafficking methods repeatedly over time. Keeping track of known methods may therefore

increase enforcement’s ability to interdict illicit ivory.

Rhino Horn

Trend s

There are far fewer rhino horn seizures in the Database than any other category covered in this report, and

as a result, a small change in rhino horn seizure numbers can appear large. Still, overall rhino horn seizure

Flying Under the Radar

numbers have remained fairly steady around an average of 11 seizures per year.

Routes

Rhino horn routes follow the flow of ivory from Africa to Asia using transit hubs in East Africa, the Middle

East, and occasionally Europe. While their paths are similar, rhino horn trafficking routes are far more

concentrated in a few significant countries. For instance, southern Africa plays a large role as the origin of

most rhino horn shipments, and China and Vietnam are by far the largest destinations in the Database.

Modus Operandi

Rhino horn is often smuggled along with ivory, and is generally moved in checked luggage or in air freight.

Like ivory, around half of the rhino horn seizures within the Database do not have associated transport

method information. Out of all the categories covered in this report, rhino horn is least likely to be carried

onto a flight in a passenger’s carry-on bag.

Reptiles

Trend s

According to the C4ADS Air Seizure Database, reptile seizures have increased overall since 2009. This

increase is at least partially a reflection of increased attention, reporting, and enforcement efforts.

The reptile heat map reveals that reptile smuggling is a far more global issue than either ivory or rhino

horn trafficking. Asia, particularly South Asia, appears as the most prominent reptile trafficking region in

the world, likely due to the turtle trade between India, Bangladesh, Malaysia, and other Southeast Asian

countries.

Routes

The reptile routes map reflects the findings of the heat map, and further demonstrates the geographic

diversity of reptile trafficking. Flights carrying trafficked reptiles have passed through Asia, Africa, the

Middle East, Europe, and the Americas, although South Asia again dominates. Unlike with ivory and rhino

horn trafficking, North and Central America appear fairly prominent as well.

Modus Operandi

Transport method information indicates that reptiles are far more likely to be moved in checked luggage than

by air freight or with passengers. Of all the categories covered in this report, the reptiles category seemed to

converge most with narcotics smuggling through airports.

Birds

Trend s

The number of bird seizures within the C4ADS Air Seizure Database has remained relatively constant over

time, although seizures did seem to spike in 2012.

The birds heat map shows bird trafficking to be a global issue, with the Americas counting the most bird

trafficking instances overall. The UAE, Russia, Pakistan, and Indonesia are also prominent.

Flying Under the Radar

Routes

While the bird routes map reflects the international nature of bird trafficking, flights seem to be concentrated

around the Middle East, Europe, and the Americas. One particularly common flight appears between South

America and New York in the United States. Bird trafficking in Africa and Asia appears to be comparatively

minor.

Modus Operandi

While birds seem to be primarily smuggled in checked baggage according to the Database, birds are also

comparatively more likely to be hidden in the clothes of a trafficker than ivory, rhino horn, or reptiles. Birds

often die in transit, and trafficked birds have been found on a number of occasions to be suffering from

infections or diseases, including H5N1, that can be passed on to humans.

Flying Under the Radar

Recommendations

Given the truly global nature of wildlife trafficking, and therefore the number of regions that we found to

be impacted by it, we have refrained from producing regional recommendations. Instead, we chose to take a

wider approach, in an effort to produce broadly applicable recommendations that, if implemented, could have

a large impact on global wildlife trafficking by air. Our recommendations are grouped below by topic, and

are meant to be applicable to enforcement, industry, intergovernmental organizations, and nongovernmental

organizations.

To expand and improve future analyses, we recommend that the appropriate stakeholders make available

more detailed public seizure reports, and begin to include transport sector information (air, maritime, land) in

existing databases. While public reporting processes are perhaps challenging at first to implement, improved

seizure data would allow C4ADS and other organizations to provide better and more helpful support to

enforcement and industry alike. We acknowledge that not all seizure information can be made available

given security and other concerns, but any increase in the amount of publicly available seizure data would be

beneficial to the sector as a whole.

In addition, many of the security vulnerabilities and modus operandi identified in our report are utilized by

more than just wildlife traffickers. Our broadly applicable recommendations could therefore be applied to

other crime types as well.

For agencies and organizations interested in taking a more proactive approach to combatting wildlife trafficking,

we have included examples, possible paths forward, and organizations to contact whenever possible.

ccxxxv

The

implementation of many of our recommendations can also be supported by the Reducing Opportunities

for Unlawful Transport of Endangered Species (ROUTES) Partnership and United for Wildlife. ROUTES

provides data and analysis, training, support, and awareness materials to interested industry and government

agencies in an effort to reduce wildlife trafficking through the legal transport sector. United for Wildlife, a

partnership of seven conservation organizations and The Royal Foundation, spearheaded the Buckingham

Palace Declaration, an agreement committing signatories to “take real steps to shut down the routes exploited

by traffickers of the illegal wildlife trade…”

ccxxxvi

Current signatories include airlines, shipping companies,

conservation organizations, and trade organizations.

ccxxxvii

We recommend the following steps be taken to improve enforcement success rates and reduce wildlife

trafficking by air.

Awareness

1. Increased awareness among air passengers, airline and airport employees, and enforcement

officials.

Increased awareness of the issue of wildlife trafficking through the air transport sector amongst all affected

parties will lead to more seizures of illegal wildlife and wildlife products.

ccxxxviii

Informed passengers will be

more likely to report suspicious activity to airline and airport personnel, and airport staff and enforcement

will be more likely to recognize illegal consignments and suspicious behavior.

A number of airports have already implemented measures designed to heighten passenger awareness of

wildlife trafficking. Jomo Kenyatta Airport, for example, clearly displays signs around the entrance to the

airport declaring certain wildlife products as banned goods. A conspicuously placed display case in Keflavik

Flying Under the Radar

Airport in Iceland showcases illegal wildlife products seized at the airport, including brief information in

English and Icelandic on CITES permitting and the dangers of the illegal wildlife trade.

Wildlife trafficking awareness training and materials can be tailored and delivered to customs, enforcement,

and the appropriate personnel by government agencies such as the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS);

nongovernmental organizations such as the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), TRAFFIC, and Freeland; trade

associations like the International Air Transport Association (IATA); and broader partnerships like ROUTES

and United for Wildlife.

2. The adoption or creation of a pamphlet or tool tailored to each country to help customs and

enforcement identify restricted species commonly trafficked through their territory.

One barrier to increased wildlife seizures is the inability of customs officials to determine which wildlife

products or species are in fact banned or protected.

A number of nonprofits have already begun to address this issue, including:

• Freeland, a nonprofit dedicated to tackling wildlife trafficking and human slavery, released a mobile

phone application in 2016 to assist law enforcement agencies in the identification and handling of

trafficked species.

ccxxxix

WildScan can be downloaded for free on Apple and Android devices, and is

currently available in English, Khmer, Bahasa Indonesian, Thai, and Vietnamese.

ccxl

• Tikki Hywood Trust, a Zimbabwean nonprofit dedicated to conservation, education, and legislation,

has developed a handbook to assist all relevant enforcement stakeholders in assessing and docketing

identified wildlife crimes appropriately.

ccxli

This approach could be repurposed to include information

on the identification of species relevant to particular jurisdictions.

Training

3. Further training on red flag indicators associated with wildlife traffickers and shipments.

Law enforcement, as well as airline and airport staff, benefit from periodic trainings on the identification

of illegal activity. While suspicious behavior exhibited by traffickers can be easy to identify, documentation

associated with a shipment is not always obviously fraudulent. Additional training tailored to the detection

of high-risk air freight consignments in particular will assist customs officials in more accurately identifying

illicit shipments.

Common red flags for passenger behavior include anxious behavior and bulging clothing. Common red

flags for air waybills include inconsistent weights, shipments of low-value bulk goods, partial or non-existent

shipper or consignee information, an unusually low estimated price given the declared products being

shipped, inconsistent information (e.g. used tire products being shipped to ‘ABC Furniture Company’), etc.

Screening trainings can be provided by organizations like the World Customs Organization (WCO), which

provides training modules on countering illicit wildlife trafficking through its Aircop project, which aims

to train customs and other law enforcement officers in the air domain. Other customs and enforcement

agencies like the US Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and US Customs and Border Protection

(CBP) have provided similar training programs in the past.

ccxlii

4. Create and provide training for airline staff on how to safely handle trafficked live or dead animals

after discovery.

Flying Under the Radar

To ensure the safety of airline personnel and passengers, as well as the animals themselves, protocols should

be developed to help airline employees handle animals immediately after discovery. In particular, staff should

be trained to deal with wildlife that gets loose or is discovered in flight, as well as how to deal with dead

animals without creating a health risk for employees or passengers.

5. Incorporate training on wildlife protocols into existing training programs.

To reduce the amount of additional time that separate trainings tailored to wildlife might entail, training on

the above and below protocols should be incorporated into existing training programs whenever possible.

Enforcement

6. Develop clear escalation procedures upon discovery of potential illegal activity.

Developing and disseminating clear escalation procedures for relevant enforcement officials and security

personnel to report or deal with identified or suspected illegal activity will help to ensure that trafficking

instances are promptly addressed. In addition, all relevant airport and airline staff should be made aware of

ways that they can report suspicious activity to the relevant authorities. Finally, the creation of a public tip

hotline for airports will increase the chances that officials will be able to intercept and stop illegal wildlife

trafficking instances. Note that creating a system that allows informants to remain anonymous will likely help

encourage reporting on suspected trafficking instances.

In the case of human trafficking, a number of organizations have developed pamphlets for airline passengers

and airport personnel to assist in the identification of potentially trafficked individuals, complete with risk

indicators or ‘Signs to Look Out For,’ first response protocols, and next step protocols. See Appendix VI for

a Human Trafficking Assessment Tool for Airlines & Airports by Human Trafficking Hotline that could be used as

a basis for a Wildlife Trafficking Assessment Tool.

7. Develop post-seizure procedures to safely and securely store wildlife products or ensure the proper

care of trafficked live animals.

ccxliii

In some locations, customs officials are reluctant to stop illegal wildlife traffickers or shipments due to non-

existent post-seizure procedures, such as a secure warehouse to store seized ivory.

ccxliv

In other cases, customs

officials may seize illegal wildlife and store it according to existing procedures, only for the product or animals

to be trafficked back into the illegal wildlife trade.

ccxlv ccxlvi

Where post-seizure procedures do not exist, customs should work to build a comprehensive post-seizure

process and disseminate it to all relevant employees. Illegal wildlife products should be stored in a secured

warehouse or similar location, with multiple checks in place to prevent seized products leaking back into the

illegal market. In Kenya, for example, seized ivory is stored in two vaults behind steel doors with multiple

locks, defended by armed guards.

ccxlvii

For live animals, a suitable wild animal veterinary practice, zoo, or safari park must be identified. An

appropriate destination will be specially equipped to care for and rehabilitate wild animals, and will have

sufficient capacity to receive dozens of animals at once. Any selected practice must be carefully vetted to

ensure the security of the animals in their care. CITES provides guidelines to assist countries in identifying

the proper course of action (reintroduction to natural habitat, captivity, or euthanasia) for seized animals,

depending on conservation status and health needs.

ccxlviii

Flying Under the Radar

8. Dedicate additional resources to combatting the illegal wildlife trade in common hub airports

exploited by wildlife traffickers.

Additional resources and attention should be committed to addressing wildlife trafficking in hub airports,

particularly in Europe, East and Southern Africa, the Middle East, and Asia.

As enforcement targets wildlife trafficking through hub airports in these regions, traffickers will naturally

shift their operations away from those hubs to hubs in new locations or to smaller regional airports. As a

result, it will be necessary to monitor seizure evidence of shifting trafficking patterns so that enforcement

efforts can shift to match.

9. Develop or enhance security procedures for transit flights.

Most enforcement officials currently have limited ability to screen passengers and shipments for illicit goods

in transit, putting the burden of detection entirely on origin and destination locations. If screening for illicit

goods could be increased in transit, enforcement officials would have an additional opportunity to stop illegal

wildlife trafficking.

This is, of course, only possible in certain circumstances. For example, when passengers and shipments have

extremely short layovers, adding another layer of complication is not feasible. In instances where a flight

lands to offload some passengers and re-fuel before flying to another destination, many passengers and their

luggage will not even exit the plane, and therefore cannot be screened. Note that it is possible that traffickers

are aware of this and take advantage of these types of flight schedules when planning their route.

ccxlix

Since

enforcement will likely not be able to remove these vulnerabilities entirely, it will be necessary to develop more

creative procedures to stop illicit trafficking activity under these circumstances. For example, implementing

customs screening for departing passengers, baggage, and cargo will likely have a significant impact on the

operations of illegal wildlife traffickers, and will reduce the risk that transiting passengers and shipments are

carrying illegal wildlife or wildlife products.

10. Develop and maintain a comprehensive internal database of entities previously involved in wildlife

seizures.

Our findings highlight the prevalence of repeat offenders involved in wildlife trafficking. To counter this

threat more effectively, enforcement should take note of individuals and companies that have previously

been involved in wildlife seizures in their jurisdictions through the creation of a comprehensive database of

entities, or through the addition of wildlife offenders to existing databases.

A useful database would be computer-based, managed by one designated individual or agency, and continuously

updated with detailed information on relevant entities. For an individual, necessary information would

include: name, age, a photo (or physical characteristics), passport information, and detailed information on

past seizures. For a company, the following categories would be relevant: name, phone numbers, addresses,

point of contact, and detailed information on past seizures. The seizure entities database would ideally be

either a part of, or linked to, the database used for seizure information (See Recommendation 13). In the

absence of sophisticated technology like Palantir or i2, a simplistic way to store such information would be in

an encrypted Excel file.

11. Develop a system to test wildlife seizure protocols.

After the implementation of updated or new customs and enforcement seizure protocols for wildlife, officials

should attempt to assess the effectiveness of their new seizure procedures. Covert testing is the most reliable

Flying Under the Radar

way to determine enforcement success rates, as most other methods must estimate the amount of unidentified

trafficking activity.

Effective testing should be convincing, varied, and occur on multiple occasions to track changes in enforcement

success over time. Results and findings should be presented in de-briefs to leadership and relevant officials.

The US TSA conducts covert testing of security systems within the US and abroad using trained ‘Red Teams’

from the Department of Homeland Security. Red Team members generally carry fake improvised bombs and

attempt to successfully pass through airport security.

ccl

This strategy could be altered slightly to test airport

screening protocols for the detection of illicit contraband, including illegal wildlife.

Seizure Reporting

12. Develop a reporting mechanism for seizures.

After a seizure has taken place, reporting mechanisms should exist to ensure that seizure information is

preserved, consolidated, and delivered to the appropriate agency for inclusion in a seizure database.

Consolidated seizure information provides customs and enforcement officials with a way to track their own

success rate, as well as monitor shifting trafficking patterns and modus operandi over time.

A successful mechanism will be relatively simple and easy to understand, and will be accompanied by training

of customs and enforcement officials on reporting protocols. The more detailed seizure information is, the

more can be done with it; given time and capability constraints, however, consistently compiling and storing

detailed seizure information may not always be feasible; see Appendix VII for a seizure reporting template

containing the baseline of information that should be collected and stored after seizures. The inclusion

of routes information (origin, transit, and destination locations) for each seizure would go a long way to

fixing many of the problems with seizure data highlighted in this report. Note that other organizations like

the WCO have created more detailed seizure reporting templates (See Appendix VII). All collected seizure

information should be stored in one centralized database (see Recommendation 13 below).

13. Store collected seizure information in one centralized database in each country.

In some countries, seizure information is held only by the agency that made the actual seizure, and is not

shared amongst the relevant customs and enforcement agencies within the country.

ccliv

In these and other

cases, seizure information is often stored in hard copy, preventing easy dissemination or storage of the seizure

data.

Similar to Recommendation 10 above, a useful database would be computer-based, ideally managed by one

designated agency, and continuously updated with detailed information on relevant entities. In the absence

of sophisticated technology like Palantir or i2, a simplistic way to store such information would be in an

encrypted Excel file. Regardless of the database manager, all relevant enforcement agencies would have access

to the database.

Once a database is designed and put to use, officials will be able to easily organize and partition information

for CITES reporting and for other purposes. For example, if an official would like to identify past seizures

using a specific type of obfuscation method, they should be able to search for the method in question and

quickly compile a list of relevant seizures. Maintaining detailed seizure records will assist in the prevention of

trafficking instances involving repeat offenders or common modus operandi.

Flying Under the Radar

14. Publicly release non-sensitive seizure information.

Once a seizure reporting mechanism is developed and implemented, and after the establishment of a

centralized database for seizure information, seizure details should be released to the public to whatever

extent possible, preferably in the form of press releases. Publishing seizure reporting, either on a website

or in periodic public reporting, provides clear evidence that enforcement efforts are effective in preventing

trafficking of all types.

In addition, providing public seizure data will allow for the creation of a positive feedback loop between

enforcement, industry, and nongovernmental organizations. For example, more seizure data improves the

type of analysis done in this report, which in turn informs enforcement about global trafficking trends and

patterns. Furthermore, publishing information on seizures can provide positive feedback to individuals who

report suspicious activity, encouraging more people to come forward and do the same. Still, we acknowledge

the need to keep some information confidential.

The Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department

ccli

and the South African Revenue Service (SARS),

cclii

for

example, maintain websites for departmental press releases on seizures and other developments. Hong Kong

Customs also releases their own statistics on their caseload, seizures, and arrests over time.

ccliii

Some customs

and enforcement agencies also maintain social media accounts where they post seizure information and other

relevant news. These reporting strategies are good models for those seeking to publicize their enforcement

successes.

Prevention

15. Pursue shift towards electronic paperwork for air freight and updated technology for screening.

Steadily increasing passenger and cargo volume has put pressure on existing screening and enforcement

procedures that are straining to effectively deal with the increase.

cclv

Furthermore, inconsistencies in

documentation may be more likely to be caught if passenger and shipment paperwork become fully electronic

and is scanned by a computer system, rather than an individual.

Implementing new technologies can take pressure off overwhelmed customs officials, expedite the screening

process for passengers and cargo, facilitate global trade, and improve interdiction success rates. Dubai Customs

World in partnership with Dubai Customs, for instance, have implemented cutting-edge technologies such

as an in-house designed Risk Engine, which is designed to quickly identify high-risk shipments.

cclvi

Smart

Security, a joint initiative of IATA and Airports Council International (ACI), is in the process of assessing

“risk-based security concepts, advanced screening technologies, and process innovations” to create guidance

materials for the aviation community and for specific airports.

cclvii

Flying Under the Radar

Appendix I – Seizure Data Biases & Vulnerabilities

Although seizure data remains the most effective way to monitor trafficking, measuring intentionally hidden

practices using only those practices that are discovered – and subsequently reported on – is inherently

problematic. To accurately interpret the various insights that seizure data provides, it is necessary to be aware

of possible biases within the data, and how they may have affected our results.

Throughout Flying Under the Radar, we have attempted to be as candid as possible about the limitations of

data to not only identify areas for improvement, but also assess how each issue may have affected our analyses.

Note that the following list is not meant to be exhaustive.

Overall

1. No baseline of wildlife seizures in the air transport sector.

During our research for this report, we found little transport-specific information on trafficking,

particularly in relation to wildlife crime. We did not find any other reports on wildlife trafficking through

the lens of one specific transport sector. This finding was reflected in the lack of transport method-

specific information in the majority of the wildlife seizure databases that we are aware of or have access

to. Similarly, although there have been quite a few reports on ivory and rhino horn trafficking, we found

little information on past reptile and bird seizure analyses. As a result, we were unable to reliably compare

our findings to past analyses.

2. Successful trafficking instances are not captured in seizure data, and therefore are not included.

Because it is impossible to measure successful smuggling activity – or trafficking instances that are never

stopped – seizure data inevitably misses some of the most effective smuggling strategies. For instance:

Because enforcement resources tend to be greater at large airports, it is possible that smaller

airports are underrepresented in the Database.

a. Domestic trafficking instances may be underrepresented as well, since domestic

flights tend to move through smaller airports.

b. Traffickers with sufficient funds may be choosing non-scheduled (e.g. private) flights

over scheduled flights.

cclviii

The inevitable exclusion of successful trafficking instances from seizure data has a particularly large

impact on determining enforcement success rates (the Country Enforcement Index, see Figure 6 and

Appendix IV). Although the Index can only be based on trafficking that has been stopped, a true

enforcement success rate would measure those shipments that successfully reach their destination as well.

3. Human error.

Reporting

4. Variability in enforcement reporting processes.

Countries whose enforcement agencies have a well-established wildlife seizure reporting system in place

Flying Under the Radar

will be more likely to have a comprehensive database including wildlife seizure data. In particular, countries

that have established a public seizure reporting protocol and platform (e.g. Hong Kong Customs and

Excise Department’s press release archive) may be overrepresented in the Database. By contrast, countries

lacking reporting systems and seizure press release platforms may be underrepresented in our data.

5. Variability in local media seizure reporting.

Local media reporting of wildlife seizures varies substantially from country to country. The likelihood that

wildlife seizures will make it into local news stories appears to depend on a variety of factors, including,

but not limited to, local awareness of and interest in wildlife trafficking, freedom of the press, and quality

of seizure reporting.

6. Variability in CITES reporting.

While some countries consistently provide CITES with comprehensive seizure information, many report

sporadically or not at all. Even within reports that make it to CITES, the detail and accuracy of the

contained seizure data can vary considerably from country to country. As a result, countries with a better

history of CITES reporting may be overrepresented in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database, while countries

without CITES reports may be underrepresented.

7. Inaccurate or contradictory reporting.

Seizure information in the media and even in confidential government reporting is often fraught with

inaccuracies, particularly right after the seizure takes place. If these mistakes were never rectified, then

those inaccurate reports may be included in our data. Contradictory seizure reports can both add

confusion to our analyses, as well as lead to the potential duplication of seizures within our Database.

Whenever possible, we attempted to clarify any apparent inconsistencies in the seizure information that

we discovered by looking for additional, official sources. Still, the potential for inaccurate reporting is a

constant and, to some extent, inevitable problem for seizure data.

8. Aggregated seizure reporting.

Some countries consistently release information on aggregated wildlife seizures, but do not report on

individual seizures. While refraining from publishing detailed information on certain seizures may

have a worthwhile purpose – confidentiality or security concerns – not publishing any seizure-specific

information prevents accurate analysis of shifting trafficking trends. We did not include any aggregated

seizure information (e.g. “Between 2013 and 2015, 100 ivory seizures were made at X Airport”) to prevent

double-counting seizures, and because aggregate seizure numbers tell us comparatively little about wildlife

trafficking trends, routes, or modus operandi.

9. Non-digital reporting.

In jurisdictions where non-digital reporting remains a prominent source of news, seizure information

may only make it into newspapers, and never on to the internet, where articles become more easily

discoverable.

10. Seizure size biases.

Larger seizures are more likely to be considered newsworthy by local media, and are therefore more likely

to reach the open source. Reports on larger seizures are also more likely to include specific details about

the seizure, including route information and obfuscation methods. As a result, our data tend to be more

Flying Under the Radar

inclusive of large-scale and medium-scale seizures than small-scale seizures. This bias could impact the

average weights of seizures within each category of the Database. Since we are more likely to have route

and other information associated with larger seizures as well, our data could be missing information on

common routes and trafficking methods associated with small-scale wildlife trafficking.

11. Language biases.

While a multi-lingual team of analysts worked together to compile the seizure information within our

Database, we were generally not able to search for seizures in less commonly used languages such as

Bengali or Laotian. Because of this, seizure reports in less common languages may not be included in our

Database, even if the reports are in the open source.

Similarly, because our team is most proficient in English, news stories written in English were more likely

to be discovered and included in the Database. However, many countries publish seizure information in

English regardless of their native language.

Public Perceptions

12. Level of awareness and public interest.

Customs and enforcement agencies are far more likely to make wildlife seizures if they are aware of the

problem in the first place. Government agencies are more likely to report on wildlife seizures if their

citizens are aware of and express interest in the issue. For instance, in Kenya, where ivory trafficking is a

well-known problem, many ivory seizures are publicly reported on by local media organizations.

Enforcement & Screening

13. Better enforcement leads to more seizures.

Effective enforcement strategies lead to higher seizure numbers, which may incorrectly create the

appearance of a large trafficking problem. If a country couples good enforcement with robust reporting,

this problem is magnified. Likewise, ineffective enforcement strategies may suggest that a country has

less of a trafficking problem than it actually does, particularly when paired with poor reporting. Since

successful smuggling statistics are unknowable, it is difficult to tell if good enforcement or large volumes

of trafficking are behind high seizure numbers.

As discussed elsewhere, this problem can be rectified to some extent by compiling the route information

associated with seizures. Route information allows for the identification of airports that consistently make

fewer seizures but experience high levels of trafficking. This solution does not work as well, however, as

an indicator for enforcement success in destination airports. Unlike trafficking in origin and transit

airports, if an illicit commodity successfully passes by enforcement in a destination airport, no other

enforcement agencies in the air transport sector will be able to catch their mistake.

14. Customs and enforcement priorities.

Enforcement agencies generally do not have the resources to prioritize every type of trafficking that moves

by air. Enforcement must therefore prioritize. In some airports, trafficked wildlife is a top priority, but in

many others, other types of trafficking – arms, narcotics, etc. – far outrank wildlife. For example, a survey

Flying Under the Radar

of customs officials by WCO in 2014 found that wildlife consistently ranked last in terms of importance

in every region except for two – East and Southern Africa and Asia Pacific.

cclix

Enforcement agencies

with particularly limited resources may not have the ability to provide training or guidance on wildlife

trafficking at all. As a result, these jurisdictions are likely underrepresented in our analysis.

15. Limited screening of passengers and shipments in transit.

Customs and enforcement officials in most airports are not able to screen passengers or shipments that

are already in transit. Seizures are therefore much more likely to take place at the origin or destination

point of trafficking instances. The resulting under emphasis on transit airports in our data has likely

skewed our results in the Country Enforcement Index. Note that the inclusion of wildlife categories that

do not share the same supply chains as ivory and rhino horn has likely mitigated this effect to an extent.

16. Seizures made for undisclosed reasons.

Seizure reports occasionally do not include the reason for the seizure, although in ivory and rhino horn

trafficking instances, the reason for the seizure is often clear. But live animal seizures can occur because

the animals are of a protected or CITES-listed species, or the animals may be legal to transport, but were

discovered in inhumane conditions. In the latter case, the seizure may not be indicative of trafficking

activity, and therefore may not be relevant to wildlife seizure analyses, but without further information

that distinction cannot be made.

17. No clear post-seizure procedure.

In some jurisdictions, customs and enforcement agencies have not developed clear post-seizure procedures

to direct enforcement officials after the discovery of illegal wildlife. In other regions, enforcement does

not have the resources to seize and store valuable illicit products or to care for live animals. When this

occurs, officials may refrain from seizing illegal wildlife or wildlife products entirely, or they may impose

a fine, but allow the trafficker to continue with their contraband.

Political

18. Freedom of the press.

In certain countries, reporting on environmental issues is discouraged. In extreme cases, environmental

journalists have been killed for their articles.

cclx

This is, of course, especially true in countries where no

free press exists. Public seizure reporting in many of these jurisdictions is, understandably, limited. Any

seizures made in these areas are therefore unlikely to make it into the C4ADS Air Seizure Database.

19. Corruption levels.

Corruption plays a large role in determining whether seizures will be made, or whether illegal products

will be allowed to pass for the price of a bribe. Although the World Bank produces numeric estimates

of corruption at the country level, we found corruption levels to vary from port to port within certain

countries, and so decided against quantitatively incorporating corruption in our analysis. We are, however,

considering ways to incorporate corruption in future reports.

20. Perception of seizures.

Some governments proudly publicize wildlife seizures as evidence of enforcement success at their airports,

Flying Under the Radar

while others choose to suppress news of seizures, thinking of them instead as evidence of a weakness.

This seems to be particularly true with large-scale ivory seizures. The C4ADS Air Seizure Database will

naturally have more seizures from countries with a positive perception of seizures than from countries

with neutral or negative perceptions.

Biases & Vulnerabilities within Routes Data

21. Overrepresentation of capitals in the routes maps.

Route information is most often reported at the country level (e.g. “The rhino horn consignment transited

through Kenya and Malaysia before arrival in Shanghai”). To include country-level routes data in our

analysis, we substituted capital cities when only country-level information was provided. As a result, our

routes maps may overemphasize capital cities.

22. False origins and destinations.

Smuggled wildlife and wildlife products are often moved across national borders by land or sea prior to

entering the air transport sector. For instance, wild birds from Peru may be driven across the border to

Bolivia before being carried onto a plane at El Alto Airport. Similarly, ivory shipments are sometimes

flown into Vietnam before being driven across the border into China. When this occurs, the origins and

destinations recorded in our air routes data do not accurately reflect the true source and destination of

the trafficking instance in question.

23. Incomplete route details.

Open source reporting on seizures frequently neglects to include route information, preventing the

inclusion of a number of our identified seizures in the routes maps.

In addition, seizure reports will often state the route of a seizure, but will not explain which airports

acted as origin, transit, or destination. For example, a media report might read, “Two Taiwanese citizens

were intercepted in Taoyuan Airport while boarding a flight to Vietnam,” but will not specify whether

Vietnam was intended to be a transit or destination point. In most of these cases, further investigation

can lead to a possible answer, but there is still a degree of guesswork involved in categorizing the airport

in question.

Flying Under the Radar

Appendix II – R Packages

The following R packages were used in this project:

• ggplot2 -- H. Wickham. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag New

York, 2009

• plyr -- Hadley Wickham (2011). The Split-Apply-Combine Strategy for Data Analysis. Journal

of Statistical Software, 40(1), 1-29. URL http://www.jstatsoft.org/v40/i01/

• dplyr -- Hadley Wickham and Romain Francois (2016). dplyr: A Grammar of Data

Manipulation. R package version 0.5.0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=dplyr

• reshape2 -- Hadley Wickham (2007). Reshaping Data with the reshape Package. Journal of

Statistical Software, 21(12), 1-20. URL http://www.jstatsoft.org/v21/i12/

• extrafont -- Winston Chang, (2014). extrafont: Tools for using fonts. R package version 0.17.

https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=extrafont

• RColorBrewer -- Erich Neuwirth (2014). RColorBrewer: ColorBrewer Palettes. R package

version 1.1-2. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=RColorBrewer

• ggalt -- Bob Rudis (2016). ggalt: Extra Coordinate Systems, Geoms and Statistical

Transformations for ‘ggplot2’. R package version 0.1.1. https://CRAN.R-project.org/

package=ggalt

• maps -- Original S code by Richard A. Becker, Allan R. Wilks. R version by Ray Brownrigg.

Enhancements by Thomas P Minka and Alex Deckmyn. (2016). maps: Draw Geographical

Maps. R package version 3.1.1. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=maps

• geosphere -- Robert J. Hijmans (2016). geosphere: Spherical Trigonometry. R package version

1.5-5. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=geosphere

• cobs -- Pin T. Ng and Martin Maechler (2015). COBS -- Constrained B-splines (Sparse matrix

based). R package version 1.3-1. URL http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=cobs

• igraph -- Csardi G, Nepusz T: The igraph software package for complex network research,

InterJournal, Complex Systems 1695. 2006. http://igraph.org

Flying Under the Radar

Appendix III – Trafficking Heat Maps

The trafficking heat maps reflect the number of trafficking instances associated with each country, as recorded

in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database. Each trafficking instance is counted once for each country along its

known transit route, regardless of the location of the seizure. For example, if a wildlife trafficker planned to

move ivory from Nigeria to China via France, Nigeria will be counted as the origin, France as transit, and

China as the destination, regardless of where the ivory was seized. Counting trafficking instances in this way,

rather than by seizure count, can reveal countries with a trafficking problem but with limited enforcement or

reporting capabilities.

Totals Heat Map

The above heat map depicts all countries involved in ivory, rhino horn, reptiles, and birds trafficking instances through the air

transport sector according to the C4ADS Air Seizure Database (January 2009 to August 2016).

Flying Under the Radar

Ivory Heat Map

The above heat map showcases all countries involved in ivory trafficking through the air transport sector, according to the C4ADS

Air Seizure Database (January 2009 to August 2016).

Rhino Horn Heat Map

The above heat map displays all countries involved in rhino horn trafficking through the air transport sector, according to the

C4ADS Air Seizure Database (January 2009 to August 2016).

Flying Under the Radar

Reptile Heat Map

The above heat map depicts all countries involved in reptile trafficking through the air transport sector, according to the C4ADS

Air Seizure Database (January 2009 to August 2016).

Bird Heat Map

The above heat map shows all countries involved in bird trafficking through the air transport sector, according to the C4ADS Air

Seizure Database (January 2009 to August 2016).

Flying Under the Radar

Appendix IV – Country Enforcement Index

The Country Enforcement Index is a quantitative representation of each country’s ability to detect and seize

illicit wildlife products traversing through its airports. Higher numbers indicate more effective enforcement

and lower numbers indicate that the country is unable to detect a large number of illicit products going

through its airports. The percentages represented in this chart were derived through the following equation:

We define ‘successfully attempted trafficking instances’ as the number of times illicit wildlife products were

trafficked through a country, regardless of whether they were seized. Only countries linked to five or more

trafficking instances were included. Seizures made prior to arrival in a given country were removed from that

country’s assessment, as that country was never in a position to stop that individual or shipment.

As with all analyses based on seizure data, a number of biases may be affecting the Index’s findings. For

instance, enforcement in countries with better reporting regimes or greater media interest in wildlife seizures

are more likely to have a higher Country Enforcement Indicator. By the same reasoning, well-performing

enforcement in countries with less reporting or media interest may rank lower in the Index. The impact of

0 %

70 %

66.7 %

50 %

61.9 %

82.3 %

33.3 %

27.8 %

77.8 %

17.6 %

55.6 %

88.9 %

58.3 %

76.9 %

72.7 %

66.7 %

0 %

25 %

79 %

63.3 %

91.7 %

50 %

55.6 %

38.7 %

50 %

28.6 %

63.2 %

10 %

68.8 %

47.8 %

0 %

88.9 %

50 %

75.9 %

68.9 %

52.6 %

85.7 %

84.6 %

88.5 %

18.2 %

Angola

Ivory Coast

Sudan

Qatar

Ethiopia

Zimbabwe

Japan

DR Congo

Nigeria

Cuba

Mozambique

South Africa

Belgium

Malaysia

Netherlands

Tanzania

Uganda

France

Mexico

Guyana

Brazil

Pakistan

Madagascar

Bangladesh

Italy

Russia

UAE

Australia

Indonesia

Thailand

India

Egypt

Kenya

China

USA

United Kingdom

Vietnam

Germany

Taiwan

Malawi

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

Country Enforcement Indicator

Figure 43. Country Enforcement Index for countries with five or more trafficking instances

Flying Under the Radar

reporting differences on the Index’s results can, however, be reduced by compiling detailed route information

for each seizure.

Note that common transit countries are generally unable to screen or stop passengers and shipments between

flights, and therefore may be misrepresented in the Index. Enforcement in air transit jurisdictions like the

UAE may appear to be performing poorly compared to enforcement in origin (e.g. Malawi) and destination

locations (e.g. China). This particular bias is mitigated to some extent by simultaneously analyzing wildlife

products with vastly different supply chains (i.e. bird trafficking origin countries are very different from ivory

origin countries). In contrast, primarily destination countries are more likely to have a higher Enforcement

Indicator, since trafficking instances that are not stopped at their destination cannot be seized at another

airport along their route.

Flying Under the Radar

Appendix V – Trafficking Routes Maps

The trafficking routes maps display the transit routes recorded in the C4ADS Air Seizure Database. Only

trafficking instances with associated route information were included in the routes maps – 28.6% of the

instances within the Database did not include the requisite information for inclusion.

Lines in the Totals Routes Map below represent one specific route. The opacity of each line reflects the

number of times that route was taken. Each circle represents specific cities, and the size of each circle is

determined by the number of times each location appeared in the routes data. City-specific information

was used wherever possible, but capital cities were used for seizure instances that only included country-level

information (e.g. a seizure made in the UK after arrival from Turkey would be depicted as one line connecting

Ankara and London; a trafficking instance originating in Kenya, transiting through the UAE, and arriving in

Indonesia would be displayed here as two lines – Nairobi to Abu Dhabi and Abu Dhabi to Jakarta).

Lines in the ivory, rhino horn, reptiles, and birds routes maps represent one flight each. Lines are lighter in

color at the origin of trafficking instances, and become darker as the flight approaches its destination.

Totals Routes Map

The above routes map charts all air trafficking routes contained within the C4ADS Air Seizure Database (January 2009 to

August 2016).

Flying Under the Radar

Ivory Trafficking Routes Map

The above routes map depicts the ivory trafficking routes contained within the C4ADS Air Seizure Database (January 2009 to

August 2016).

Rhino Horn Trafficking Routes Map

The above routes map charts the rhino horn trafficking routes contained within the C4ADS Air Seizure Database (January 2009

to August 2016).

Flying Under the Radar

Reptile Trafficking Routes Map

The above routes map portrays the reptile trafficking routes contained within the C4ADS Air Seizure Database (January 2009 to

August 2016).

Bird Trafficking Routes Map

The above routes map plots the bird trafficking routes contained within the C4ADS Air Seizure Database (January 2009 to

August 2016).

Flying Under the Radar

Appendix VI – Human Trafficking Assessment Tool for Airlines &

Airports

cclxi

Flying Under the Radar

Appendix VII – Seizure Reporting

In an attempt to reduce the amount of time and effort needed to track seizures, C4ADS designed the below

template as a simplistic framework for seizure reporting. A more detailed seizure reporting template is included

in WCO’s Customs Enforcement Network (CEN) platform.

cclxii

Seizure Date:

Arrested

Individual 1:

Name:

Sex: Age: Nationality: Passport: Repeat

Offender: Y/N

Arrested

Individual 2:

Name:

Sex: Age: Nationality: Passport: Repeat

Offender: Y/N

Contraband Seized 1: Weight/Number:

Contraband Seized 2: Weight/Number:

Airline: Flight No.:

Origin: Transit Location(s): Destination:

Transport

Method:

(Check one)

Air Freight Luggage Passenger Carry-

Passenger Clothes Other

Number of Suitcases or Freight Parcels:

Obfuscation Method (e.g. tin foil, garlic):

Manner of Detection (e.g. X-ray revealed suspicious object):

Suspect(s) History:

Additional Details:

Flying Under the Radar

End Notes

i Nellemann, C. (Editor in Chief); Henriksen, R., Kreilhuber, A., Stewart, D., Kotsovou, M., Raxter,

P., Mrema, E., and Barrat, S. (Eds). The Rise of Environmental Crime – A Growing Threat To Natural

Resources Peace, Development And Security. United Nations Environment Programme and RHIPTO Rapid

Response–Norwegian Center for Global Analyses, 2016. http://unep.org/documents/itw/environmental_

crimes.pdf.

Ibid.

iii Vira, Varun and Thomas Ewing. Ivory’s Curse: The Militarization & Professionalization

of Poaching in Africa. Born Free USA and C4ADS, April 2014. https://static1.squarespace.com/

static/566ef8b4d8af107232d5358a/t/571a2d5459827ebe07596a71/1461333351821/Ivory%27s+Curse.pdf.

Vira, Varun, Thomas Ewing, and Jackson Miller. Out of Africa: The Global Trade in

Illicit Elephant Ivory. Born Free USA and C4ADS, August 2014. https://static1.squarespace.com/

static/566ef8b4d8af107232d5358a/t/56af83ee1f40390e88337743/1454343151910/Out+of+Africa.pdf.

UNODC. World Wildlife Crime Report: Trafficking in Protected Species. UNODC, May 2016.

www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/wildlife/World_Wildlife_Crime_Report_2016_final.pdf.

vi Nellemann, C. (Editor in Chief); Henriksen, R., Kreilhuber, A., Stewart, D., Kotsovou, M., Raxter,

P., Mrema, E., and Barrat, S. (Eds). The Rise of Environmental Crime – A Growing Threat To Natural

Resources Peace, Development And Security. United Nations Environment Programme and RHIPTO Rapid

Response–Norwegian Center for Global Analyses, 2016. http://unep.org/documents/itw/environmental_

crimes.pdf.

vii

UNODC. World Wildlife Crime Report: Trafficking in Protected Species. UNODC, May 2016.

www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/wildlife/World_Wildlife_Crime_Report_2016_final.pdf.

viii “Background.” TRAFFIC. TRAFFIC International. www.traffic.org/trade/.

ix Underwood FM, Burn RW, and T. Milliken. Dissecting the Illegal Ivory Trade: An Analysis of Ivory

Seizures Data. PLoS ONE 8(10): e76539, 2013. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0076539.

x Milliken T., Underwood, F.M., Burn, R.W., and L. Sangalakula. “Addendum to the Elephant Trade

Information System (ETIS) and the Illicit Trade in Ivory: A report to the 17th meeting of the Conference of

the Parties to CITES.” CoP17 Doc. 57.6 (Rev. 1) Addendum. 22 Sep. 2016. https://cites.org/sites/default/

files/eng/cop/17/WorkingDocs/E-CoP17-57-06-R1-Add.pdf.

“Great Elephant Census Final Results.” Great Elephant Census. http://www.greatelephantcensus.

com/final-report/.

xii The Great Elephant Census | A Paul G. Allen Project.” Great Elephant Census. Great Elephant

Census, 31 Aug. 2016. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5304f39be4b0c1e749b456be/t/57c71ec12994ca

8ea022a952/147266734 4389/GEC+Results+Summary+Fact+Sheet+FINAL_8+26+2016.pdf.

xiii

Mathiesen, Karl. “Tanzania Elephant Population Declined by 60% in Five Years, Census Reveals.”

The Guardian, 02 June 2015. www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jun/02/tanzania-epicentre-of-

elephant-poaching-census-reveals.

xiv

UNODC. World Wildlife Crime Report: Trafficking in Protected Species. UNODC, May 2016.

Flying Under the Radar

www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/wildlife/World_Wildlife_Crime_Report_2016_final.pdf.

xv “Poaching Statistics.” Save the Rhino. Save the Rhino International. www.savetherhino.org/rhino_

info/poaching_statistics.

xvi Ibid.

xvii “Rhinoplax Vigil.” IUCN Red List. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural

Resources. www.iucnredlist.org/details/22682464/0.

xviii “Astrochelys Yniphora.” IUNC Red List. International Union for Conservation of Nature and

Natural Resources. www.iucnredlist.org/details/9016/0.

xix Fishel, Justin and Mike Levine. “TSA Director Reassigned in Wake of Security Failures.” ABC

News. ABC News, 2 June 2015. http://abcnews.go.com/US/tsa-director-reassigned-wake-security-failures/

stor y?id=31458476.

Neffenger, Peter V. “TSA Security Gaps.” Statement before the United States House Committee

on Oversight and Government Reform, 3 Nov. 2015. www.tsa.gov/news/testimony/2015/11/03/testimony-

hearing-tsa-security-gaps.

xxi

“IATA Forecasts Passenger Demand to Double Over 20 Years.” International Air Transport

Association. www.iata.org/pressroom/pr/Pages/2016-10-18-02.aspx.

xxii Vira, Varun, Thomas Ewing, and Jackson Miller. Out of Africa: The Global Trade in

Illicit Elephant Ivory. Born Free USA and C4ADS, August 2014. https://static1.squarespace.com/

static/566ef8b4d8af107232d5358a/t/56af83ee1f40390e88337743/1454343151910/Out+of+Africa.pdf.

xxiii

“Wildlife smugglers eye emerging airports.” The Times of India. 29 Sep. 2015. http://timesofindia.

indiatimes.com/city/madurai/Wildlife-smugglers-eye-emerging-airports/articleshow/49150160.cms.

xxiv “ACI Media Releases.” Airports Council International. 9 Sep. 2016. www.aci.aero/News/Releases/

Most-Recent/2016/09/09/Airports-Council-International-releases-2015-World-Airport-Traffic-Report-The-

busiest-become-busier-the-year-of-the-international-hub-airport.

xxv

Iyorah, Festus. “The 10 Largest Airports in Africa.” The African Exponent. The Exponent Network,

13 Sep. 2016. www.africanexponent.com/post/7898-africas-10-largest-airports.

xxvi Ibid.

xxvii “象牙走私拼图：象牙贸易生了走私市场（The Paradox of Ivory Smuggling: The Legal Ivory Trade

Promotes a Rapidly Expanding Black Market).” Weekly Times, 20 June 2014. http://collection.sina.com.cn/

yjjj/20140620/0820155196.shtml.

xxviii

Ibid.

xxix Ibid.

xxx “Rare Tortoises and Drugs Found in Abandoned Luggage.” WWF. World Wildlife Fund for Nature,

15 June 2010. http://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?193844/Rare-tortoises-and-drugs-found-in-abandoned-

luggage.

xxxi

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) monitors the transnational

Flying Under the Radar

wildlife trade, and lists endangered species on one of three appendices at the behest of its party countries.

Appendix I bans all international trade in a species, except in exceptional circumstances, while Appendix II

lists all species whose trade must be controlled to preserve the health of the species. Appendix III “contains

species that are protected in at least one country, which has asked other CITES Parties for assistance in

controlling the trade.” (“How CITES Works.” Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of

Wild Fauna and Flora. https://cites.org/eng/disc/how.php.)

xxxii

“Birds and Their Droppings Can Carry Over 60 Diseases.” Medical News Today. MediLexicon

International Ltd., 22 Sep. 2014. www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/61646.php.

xxxiii Jacob, Jacqueline P. et. al. Avian Diseases Transmissible to Humans. University of Florida – Institute

of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) Extension. http://vetextension.wsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/

sites/8/2015/03/Avian-Diseases-Transmissible-to-Humans1.pdf.

xxxiv

Nordqvist, Christian. “What is Avian Flu? What is Bird Flu?” Medical News Today. MediLexicon

International Ltd., 23 Feb. 2015. www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/5556.php.

xxxv “FAQs: H5N1 Influenza.” World Health Organization. WHO. www.who.int/influenza/human_

animal_interface/avian_influenza/h5n1_research/faqs/en/.

xxxvi Import Procedures for a Pet Bird Entering (Non-U.S. Origin) the United States.” USDA APHIS.

USDA, 18 Oct. 2016. www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalhealth/animal-and-animal-product-import-

information/import-live-animals/sa_avian/ct_nonus_pet_bird.

xxxvii

Neil D’Cruze and David W. Macdonald note, “…we raise pre-existing concerns that CITES records

are incomplete, with no data on live seizures provided by 70% of countries party to CITES.” (D’Cruze, N,

Macdonald DW. “A Review of Global Trends in CITES Live Wildlife Confiscations.” Nature Conservation

15: 47-63, 22 Sep. 2016. doi: 10.3897/natureconservation.15.10005.)

xxxviii

D’Cruze, N, Macdonald DW. “A Review of Global Trends in CITES Live Wildlife Confiscations.”

Nature Conservation 15: 47-63, 22 Sep. 2016. doi: 10.3897/natureconservation.15.10005.

xxxix “A guide to using the CITES Trade Database.” Convention on International Trade in Endangered

Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. https://trade.cites.org/cites_trade_guidelines/en-CITES_Trade_Database_

Guide.pdf.

“The Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS).” Convention on International Trade in Endangered

Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. www.cites.org/eng/prog/etis/index.php.

xli “EU TWIX.” EU-TWIX. 2016. http://eu-twix.org/.

xlii The “open source” here refers to all publicly available sources of information, e.g. local news reports,

CITES reports, customs press releases, etc.

xliii Other species, such as pangolins and abalone, which were not initially included in our analysis due

to time constraints, will be incorporated into the seizure databases in future years.

xliv UNODC. World Wildlife Crime Report: Trafficking in Protected Species. UNODC, May 2016.

www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/wildlife/World_Wildlife_Crime_Report_2016_final.pdf.

xlv R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical

Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2016. www.R-project.org/.

Flying Under the Radar

xlvi Milliken, Tom. Illegal Trade in Ivory and Rhino Horn: An Assessment to Improve Law Enforcement

Under the Wildlife TRAPS Project. USAID and TRAFFIC International, 2014. www.usaid.gov/sites/default/

files/documents/1865/W-TRAPS-Elephant-Rhino-report.pdf.

xlvii

“国务院办公厅关于有序停止商业性加工销售象牙及制品活动的通知.” The State Council of

China. 30 Dec. 2016. www.gov.cn/zhengce/content/2016-12/30/content_5155017.htm.

xlviii

“Wild and Precious Exhibit Travels from Bangkok and Shanghai to Beijing and Nairobi.” Convention

on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. https://cites.org/eng/Wild_and_

Precious_Exhibit_travels_from_Bangkok_and_Shanghai_to_Beijing_and_Nairobi; “Kenya Airways Backs

Anti-Poaching Campaign.” WildlifeDirect. 30 July 2013. http://newsroom.wildlifedirect.org/2013/07/30/

kenya-airways-backs-anti-poaching-campaign/.

xlix

A May 2015 report undertaken on behalf of the Department of National Parks and Wildlife of

Malawi included Malawi’s wildlife seizure data from 1989 to 2014. The report’s authors gathered the data

from a variety of different Malawian government agencies that had compiled their own internal seizure

databases in hard copy. According to the report, “…reviewers found there to be a lack of reliable available data,

making it is [sic] almost impossible to identify detailed crime patterns or trends. Several agencies seemed to

have not historically recorded or retained wildlife crime data, and those that did often stored it in hard copy

only, making it very difficult to access and analyse. In total, 50 wildlife crime cases were analysed by reviewers,

the majority of which were ivory offences at airports.” (Waterland, Shelley, et. al. Illegal Wildlife Trade Review

Malawi. German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) through Deutsche

Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH: German International Cooperation, Lilongwe

Wildlife Trust, Born Free Foundation, and the Department of National Parks and Wildlife of Malawi, May

2015. www.lilongwewildlife.org/wp-content/uploads/IWT-Review-Malawi.pdf.)

Ibid.

li Milliken, Tom. Illegal Trade in Ivory and Rhino Horn: An Assessment to Improve Law Enforcement

Under the Wildlife TRAPS Project. USAID and TRAFFIC International, 2014. www.usaid.gov/sites/default/

files/documents/1865/W-TRAPS-Elephant-Rhino-report.pdf.

lii

Figure 7 depicts a timeline of all ivory seizures in the Database, as well as timelines for large-scale

(greater than 500 kilograms) and medium-scale (greater than 100 kilograms) shipments. Seizures are split by

weight class as different size shipments tend to share certain characteristics. Large-scale ivory shipments, for

instance, indicate organized criminal involvement and generally move by air freight. Medium-scale shipments

are indicative of organized crime as well, but can move in air freight shipments or in multiple checked

suitcases. Medium-scale air freight shipments often follow each other in quick succession. Small-scale ivory

trafficking (anything below 100 kilograms) can include anything from an uneducated tourist with an ivory

bangle, to small-scale networks moving worked ivory to workshops or markets elsewhere.

liii

China is the world’s largest legal and illegal ivory market according to the Elephant Action League,

Wildaid, and other conservation organizations. A report by Fiona Underwood, Robert Burn, and Tom Milliken

titled Dissecting the Illegal Ivory Trade: An Analysis of Ivory Seizures Data attribute the rapid growth in

illegal ivory trade activity since 2007 to the increased consumption in China. (Crosta, Andrea, et. al. Blending

Ivory: China’s Old Loopholes, New Hopes. Elephant Action League, Dec. 2015. www.elephantleague.org/wp-

content/uploads/2016/02/Report-China-Blending-Ivory-Dec2015.pdf; Ivory Demand in China 2012-2014.

WildAid, Save the Elephants, and the African Wildlife Foundation, 2014. http://wildaid.org/sites/default/

files/resources/Print_Ivory%20Report_Final_v3.pdf ; Underwood FM, Burn RW, Milliken T. Dissecting the

100

Flying Under the Radar

Illegal Ivory Trade: An Analysis of Ivory Seizures Data. PLoS ONE 8(10): e76539, 2013. doi:10.1371/journal.

pone.0076539.)

liv

Weru, Sam. Wildlife Protection and Trafficking Assessment in Kenya: Drivers and Trends of

Transnational Wildlife Crime in Kenya and Its Role as a Transit Point for Trafficked Species in East Africa.

TRAFFIC, 2016. https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/Traf-126.pdf.

Iyorah, Festus. “The 10 Largest Airports in Africa.” The African Exponent. The Exponent Network,

13 Sep. 2016. www.africanexponent.com/post/7898-africas-10-largest-airports.

lvi Zhao Wen. “Man gets 7 years for smuggling ivory items.” Shanghai Daily. 19 June 2013. http://

en.people.cn/90882/8289766.html; Wang Lin. “ 行李箱装象牙和犀角制品 (图).” Sohu. 18 June 2013.

http://roll.sohu.com/20130618/n379177909.shtml.

lvii

Ibid.

lviii Ibid.

lix “Shanghai Arrests for illegal rhino horn and ivory purchases.” Xinhua News. 20 March 2013. https://

africanwildlifetrust.blogspot.com/2013/03/shanghai-arrests-for-illegal-rhino-horn.html.

lx Ibid.

lxi Ibid.

lxii “Plus de 350 kilos d’ivoire saisis par la douane en Ile-de-France.” French Customs. 8 June 2016. www.

douane.gouv.fr/articles/a12860-plus-de-350-kg-d-ivoire-saisis-par-la-douane-en-ile-de-france.

lxiii Ibid.

lxiv Aslanoff, Samuel. “Plus de 350 kilos d’ivoire saisis par la douane en Ile-de-France.” France Bleu,

8 June 2016. www.francebleu.fr/infos/societe/plus-de-350-kilos-d-ivoire-saisis-par-la-douane-en-ile-de-

france-1465315616.

lxv

Ibid.

lxvi Ibid.

lxvii “VIDEO. Une saisie record de 350 kilos de defenses d’éléphants, en France.” Normandie Actu.

9 June 2016. www.normandie-actu.fr/video-une-saisie-record-de-350-kilos-de-defenses-d-elephants-en-

france_211171/.

lxviii

Ibid.

lxix Milliken, Tom. Illegal Trade in Ivory and Rhino Horn: An Assessment to Improve Law Enforcement

Under the Wildlife TRAPS Project. USAID and TRAFFIC International, 2014. www.usaid.gov/sites/default/

files/documents/1865/W-TRAPS-Elephant-Rhino-report.pdf.

lxx

In the 2014 report, Illegal Trade in Ivory and Rhino Horn: An Assessment to Improve Law

Enforcement Under the Wildlife TRAPS Project, Milliken determines the average weight of trafficked rhino

horns to be 2.78 kilograms. This estimate assumes that 90% of trafficked horns are from white rhinos, and

combines the average weight of white rhino horns (2.94 kg) and black rhino horns (2.65 kg).

lxxi

Milliken, Tom. Illegal Trade in Ivory and Rhino Horn: An Assessment to Improve Law Enforcement

101

Flying Under the Radar

Under the Wildlife TRAPS Project. USAID and TRAFFIC International, 2014. www.usaid.gov/sites/default/

files/documents/1865/W-TRAPS-Elephant-Rhino-report.pdf.

lxxii

Like with ivory, larger shipments of rhino horn are generally indicative of more sophisticated criminal

involvement. To monitor changes in different weight classes over time, we assigned the top 10% of rhino horn

seizures by weight to the large-scale weight class, and the top 10-50% to the medium-scale class. All other

seizures were considered small-scale.

lxxiii

Milliken, Tom. Illegal Trade in Ivory and Rhino Horn: An Assessment to Improve Law Enforcement

Under the Wildlife TRAPS Project. USAID and TRAFFIC International, 2014. www.usaid.gov/sites/default/

files/documents/1865/W-TRAPS-Elephant-Rhino-report.pdf; Dixon, Robyn. “Vietnam, the Biggest Hub for

Illegal Rhino Horn Trafficking, Has Done Little to Stop It.” Los Angeles Times. 26 Sep. 2016. www.latimes.

com/world/africa/la-fg-vietnam-rhino-trafficking-20160926-snap-story.html.

lxxiv

As illegal shipments grow larger, a higher degree of coordination, is necessary to increase the chances

that shipments will arrive at their destinations unimpeded. In keeping with this principle, reptile shipments

have been divided into large- and medium-scale categories in order to identify shifting patterns in likely

organized criminal activity. The top 10% of reptile seizures by weight are considered large-scale, while the top

10-50% by weight are medium-scale.

lxxv

Oppili, P. “Over 8,000 Captive Baby Tortoises Die.” The Hindu. 29 March 2013. www.thehindu.

com/news/cities/chennai/over-8000-captive-baby-tortoises-die/article4559180.ece.

lxxvi “Custom Officials Seize Over 10,000 Exotic Turtles at Kolkata Airport; Suspected Smugglers

Detained.” International Business Times. 20 July 2013. www.ibtimes.co.in/custom-officials-seize-over-10000-

exotic-turtles-at-kolkata-airport-suspected-smugglers-detained-492669.

lxxvii

D’Cruze, Neil, et. al. “A Star Attraction: The Illegal Trade in Indian Star Tortoises.” Nature

Conservation, vol. 13, 9 Nov. 2015, pp. 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.13.5625.

lxxviii Similarly to the previous categories, larger bird shipments are more likely to be associated with

organized criminal activity. Tracking changes in those shipments can therefore give some indication of

changes in the modus operandi of criminal networks. To that end, the top 10% of bird seizures by weight are

classified as large-scale, and the top 20-50% by weight are considered medium-scale.

lxxix

“1000 Grey Parrots Rescued from Trappers in Cameroon.” Wildlife Extra. Feb. 2010. www.

wildlifeextra.com/go/news/parrot-rescue.html#cr.

lxxx “Bird Smuggling Bid Foiled.” The Daily Star. 3 July 2010. www.thedailystar.net/news-detail-145157.

lxxxi Hoang, Viet. “Police Seize Hundreds of Smuggled Birds at Tan Son Nhat Airport.” Thanh Nien

News. 9 Sep. 2014. www.thanhniennews.com/society/police-seize-hundreds-of-smuggled-birds-at-tan-son-

nhat-airport-30887.html.

lxxxii

Rueb, Emily S. “Tiny Birds, Big Drama: Inside the World of the Birdmen of Queens.” The New York

Times. The New York Times Company, 31 July 2015. www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/nyregion/tiny-birds-big-

drama-inside-the-world-of-the-birdmen-of-queens.html

lxxxiii

“Two fined for bird smuggling.” Kaieteur News. 1 May 2016. www.kaieteurnewsonline.

com/2016/05/01/two-fined-for-bird-smuggling/.

lxxxiv Ibid.

102

Flying Under the Radar

lxxxv Ibid.

lxxxvi Rueb, Emily S. “Tiny Birds, Big Drama: Inside the World of the Birdmen of Queens.” The New York

Times. The New York Times Company, 31 July 2015. www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/nyregion/tiny-birds-big-

drama-inside-the-world-of-the-birdmen-of-queens.html

lxxxvii

Ibid.

lxxxviii Ibid.

lxxxix Ibid.

xc Marzulli, John. “Time to Raid Your Nest, Bird Smuggler.” Daily News. NY Daily News, 14 April 2009.

www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/bird-smuggler-guyana-pleads-guilty-2006-charges-finches-article-1.360560

xci Ibid.

xcii Marzulli, John. “Clip JFK Flier with Finches Up His Sleeve.” Daily News. NY Daily News, 27 June

2012. www.nydailynews.com/new-york/clip-bird-brain-jfk-9-finches-sleeve-article-1.1102965.

xciii Ibid.

xciv “Finch Smuggler Sentenced for Trafficking for ‘Tweets’.” U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Northeast Blog.

6 May 2013. https://usfwsnortheast.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/finch-smuggler-sentenced-for-trafficking-for-

t w e e t s /.

xcv

“US-based Guyanese found with birds in pants crotch at airport.” Stabroek News. 5 Sep. 2012. http://

www.stabroeknews.com/2012/news/stories/09/05/us-based-guyanese-found-with-birds-in-pants-crotch-at-

airport/.

xcvi

Ibid.

xcvii Ibid.

xcviii “Man caught trying to smuggle singing birds through airport.” News Source Guyana. 21 Jan. 2014.

http://newssourcegy.com/news/man-caught-trying-to-smuggle-singing-birds-through-airport/.

xcix Ibid.

c Ibid.

ci “Smuggler Found with Birds in Hair Curlers During Airport Search.” Stabroek News. 23 Jan. 2014.

www.stabroeknews.com/2014/news/stories/01/23/smuggler-found-birds-hair-curlers-airport-search/.

cii Ibid.

ciii “Would-Be Smuggler Nabbed at Airport with Birds in Curlers.” Stabroek News. 17 June 2014. www.

stabroeknews.com/2014/news/stories/06/17/smuggler-nabbed-airport-birds-curlers/.

civ Ibid.

cv “Brampton Man Attempts to Conceal 19 Songbirds During Visit to Toronto Pearson International

Airport.” Ontario SPCA. 26 Mar. 2015. http://ontariospca.ca/media-centre/media-releases/977-brampton-

man-attempts-to-conceal-19-songbirds-during-visit-to-toronto-pearson-international-airport.html.

103

Flying Under the Radar

cvi Ibid.

cvii Todorova, Vesela. “Dubai ‘Major Hub’ for Wildlife Trafficking: Report.” The National. Abu Dhabi

Media, 4 Dec. 2013. www.thenational.ae/uae/environment/dubai-major-hub-for-wildlife-trafficking-report.

cviii “Air Transport in Kenya.” Fortune of Africa. http://fortuneofafrica.com/kenya/air-transport-in-

k e n y a /.

cix Nairobi’s prominence in the ivory category of the C4ADS’ Air Seizure Database is likely an effect of

heightened awareness, stronger enforcement, and frequent reporting.

cx “ACI Media Releases.” Airports Council International. 9 Sep. 2016. www.aci.aero/News/Releases/

Most-Recent/2016/09/09/Airports-Council-International-releases-2015-World-Airport-Traffic-Report-The-

busiest-become-busier-the-year-of-the-international-hub-airport.

cxi

“Country-by-Country Findings.” The Great Elephant Census. Vulcan and The Paul G. Allen

Foundation, 31 Aug. 2016. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5304f39be4b0c1e749b456be/t/57c

71f5fcd0f68b39c3f4bfa/1472667487326/GEC+Results+Country+by+Country+Findings+Fact+Sheet_

FINAL_8+26+2016.pdf.

cxii

Ibid.

cxiii “Hong Kong Customs Seizes Suspected Ivory Cut Pieces at Airport.” Customs and Excise Department:

The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. 4 Sep. 2015. www.customs.gov.hk/en/

publication_press/press/index_id_1409.html.

cxiv

Ibid.

cxv Ibid.

cxvi “Hong Kong Customs Seizes Suspected Ivory Cut Pieces at Airport (with Photos).” Customs and

Excise Department: The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. 7 Sep. 2015. www.

customs.gov.hk/en/publication_press/press/index_id_1413.html.

cxvii

Ibid.

cxviii Emslie, R. “Ceratotherium simum.” The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2012. http://dx.doi.

org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2012.RLTS.T4185A16980466.en.

cxix Zhao Wen. “Man gets 7 years for smuggling ivory items.” Shanghai Daily. 19 June 2013. http://

en.people.cn/90882/8289766.html; Wang Lin. “行李箱装象牙和犀角制品(图).” Sohu. 18 June 2013. http://

roll.sohu.com/20130618/n379177909.shtml; “Shanghai Arrests for illegal rhino horn and ivory purchases.”

Xinhua News. 20 March 2013. https://africanwildlifetrust.blogspot.com/2013/03/shanghai-arrests-for-illegal-

rhino-horn.html.

cxx

“Man Remanded for Smuggling Star Tortoises.” The Hindu. 29 Sep. 2015. www.thehindu.com/

news/cities/Madurai/man-remanded-for-smuggling-star-tortoises/article7700080.ece.

cxxi Ibid.

cxxii “Wildlife smugglers eye emerging airports.” The Times of India. 29 Sep. 2015. http://timesofindia.

indiatimes.com/city/madurai/Wildlife-smugglers-eye-emerging-airports/articleshow/49150160.cms.

104

Flying Under the Radar

cxxiii Ibid.

cxxiv “Man Remanded for Smuggling Star Tortoises.” The Hindu. 29 Sep. 2015. www.thehindu.com/

news/cities/Madurai/man-remanded-for-smuggling-star-tortoises/article7700080.ece.

cxxv “Wildlife smugglers eye emerging airports.” The Times of India. 29 Sep. 2015. http://timesofindia.

indiatimes.com/city/madurai/Wildlife-smugglers-eye-emerging-airports/articleshow/49150160.cms.

cxxvi “Airplane Handgun Smuggle Bid Is Foiled by Feds.” The Smoking Gun. 13 May 2013. www.

thesmokinggun.com/documents/flier-wraps-gun-in-aluminum-foil-784521.

cxxvii Osada, Jasmine. “Terminally Ill Man Jailed 9 Weeks for Smuggling Birds.” The Straits Times. 17 Oct.

2015. www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/terminally-ill-man-jailed-9-weeks-for-smuggling-birds.

cxxviii Ibid.

cxxix Ibid.

cxxx Ibid.

cxxxi Ibid.

cxxxii “Largest Seizure of Critically Endangered Ploughshare Tortoises Made in Thailand.” TRAFFIC.

TRAFFIC International, 19 Mar. 2013. www.traffic.org/home/2013/3/19/largest-seizure-of-critically-

endangered-ploughshare-tortois.html.

cxxxiii

Justice, Adam. “Zurich Airport Customs Seize Record 262kg of Ivory.” International Business Times.

IB Times Co. Ltd., 4 Aug. 2015. www.ibtimes.co.uk/zurich-airport-customs-seize-record-262kg-ivory-1514056.

cxxxiv “Eight Suitcases Full of Ivory Seized at Zurich Airport.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media

Limited, 4 Aug. 2015. www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/aug/04/eight-suitcases-full-of-ivory-seized-

at-zurich-airport.

cxxxv

“Chinese Ivory Smugglers Return Home.” Beijing International. www.ebeijing.gov.cn/

BeijingInformation/BeijingNewsUpdate/t1398537.htm.

cxxxvi The incident did not appear to be isolated; Tanzanian officials at the time of the seizure noted

similarities between the case and a July 2013 drug smuggling case, when two Tanzanian socialites reportedly

smuggled several large bags packed full of drugs through Julius Nyerere Airport in Dar es Salaam. (“Cunning

Chinese Ivory Smugglers Unmasked.” The Citizen. 17 Aug. 2015. www.thecitizen.co.tz/News/Cunning-

Chinese-ivory-smugglers-unmasked/1840340-2835598-s1tvfb/index.html.)

cxxxvii

“Ibama Apreende Pássaros Que Embarcavam Ilegalmente No Aeroporto De Brasília.” ADERJ.

Associação Defensores Da Represa De Jurumirim, 16 Nov. 2010. www.aderjurumirim.org/site/noticias/

Ibama-apreende-passaros-que-embarcavam-ilegalmente-no-aeroporto-de-Brasilia/1220.html.

cxxxviii

Cobra II Newsletter Issue 1; Wee, Darren. “Kenya Extradites Alleged Illegal Ivory Kingpin to China.”

South China Morning Post. South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd, 10 Feb. 2014. www.scmp.com/news/

china/article/1425650/kenya-extradites-alleged-illegal-ivory-kingpin-china.

cxxxix

“On the Trail: Information and Analysis Bulletin on Animal Poaching and Smuggling | N°11 / 1st

October – 31st December 2015.” Robin Des Bois. ROBIN DES BOIS, 9 Mar. 2016. www.robindesbois.org/

wpcontent/uploads/ON_THE_TRAIL_11.pdf.

105

Flying Under the Radar

cxl “Ibama Apreende Pássaros Que Embarcavam Ilegalmente No Aeroporto De Brasília.” ADERJ.

Associação Defensores Da Represa De Jurumirim, 16 Nov. 2010. www.aderjurumirim.org/site/noticias/

Ibama-apreende-passaros-que-embarcavam-ilegalmente-no-aeroporto-de-Brasilia/1220.html. ; “230 Canários-

da-Terra São Apreendidos no Aeroporto de Brasilia.” ANDA. Agência de Notícias de Direitos Animais, 16

Nov. 2010. www.anda.jor.br/16/11/2010/230-canarios-da-terra-sao-apreendidos-no-aeroporto-de-brasilia.

cxli

“230 Turtles from India Seized at Bangkok Airport: Report.” NDTV. Indo-Asian News Service, 15

May 2014. www.ndtv.com/india-news/230-turtles-from-india-seized-at-bangkok-airport-report-562041.

cxlii “510 Tortoises Rescued at Dhaka Airport.” Prothom Alo. 15 Dec. 2014. http://en.prothom-alo.com/

bangladesh/news/57107/510-tortoises-rescues-at-Dhaka-airport.

cxliii “Ibama Pode Sacrificar Pássaros que PF Apreendeu.” O Globo. 24 June 2011. https://blogmarcelolira.

blogspot.com/2011/06/ibama-pode-sacrificar-passaros-absurdo.html.

cxliv “Thailand Rhino Horns.” AP Archive. The Associated Press, 20 June 2014. www.aparchive.com/

metadata/youtube/4081ad2f16c3885f5ec7edb366f7deef; “On the Trail: Information and Analysis Bulletin

on Animal Poaching and Smuggling | N°4 / 1st January – 31st March 2014.” Robin Des Bois. ROBIN DES

BOIS, 9 Mar. 2016. www.robindesbois.org/wpcontent/uploads/ON_THE_TRAIL_4.pdf.

cxlv

Al-Othman, Hannah. “Huge Haul of Illegal Ivory Found in Suitcase at Heathrow Airport.” Evening

Standard. 23 Nov. 2015. www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/huge-haul-of-illegal-ivory-found-in-suitcase-at-

heathrow-airport-a3121141.html

cxlvi

Gowhar, Imran. “Terrapin Smuggling Racket Busted, Two Held.” The Hindu. 30 June 2015. www.

thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/terrapin-smuggling-racket-busted-two-held/article7368630.ece.

cxlvii Ibid.

cxlviii Ibid.

cxlix “Hong Kong Customs Seizes Suspected Ivory Tusks and Ivory Products at Airport (with Photo).”

Customs and Excise Department: The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. 28 July

2015. www.customs.gov.hk/en/publication_press/press/index_id_1382.html.

“Hong Kong Customs Seizes Suspected Ivory Products at Airport (with Photos).” Customs and

Excise Department: The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. 17 April 2016. www.

customs.gov.hk/en/publication_press/press/index_id_1586.html.

cli

Momanyi, Bernard. “Airport Staff Suspects in Sh130m Ivory Probe.” Capital News. Capital Digitel

Media, 6 May 2011. www.capitalfm.co.ke/news/2011/05/airport-staff-suspects-in-shm-ivory-probe/; AFP.

“Kenya Seizes 600 kg of Nigeria-Bound Ivory.” Modern Ghana. MG Media Group, 22 June 2012. www.

modernghana.com/news/402835/1/kenya-seizes-600-kg-of-nigeria-bound-ivory.html.

clii

“Hong Kong Customs Seizes Suspected Ivory Products at Airport (with Photos).” Customs and Excise

Department: The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. 7 Aug. 2015. www.customs.

gov.hk/en/publication_press/press/index_id_1388.html.

cliii

Ibid.

cliv “Hong Kong Customs Seizes Suspected Ivory Cut Pieces and Products at Airport (with Photos).”

Customs and Excise Department: The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. 24

106

Flying Under the Radar

Aug. 2015. www.customs.gov.hk/en/publication_press/press/index_id_1401.html.

clv Ibid.

clvi Ibid.

clvii “Hong Kong Customs seizes suspected ivory tusks and ivory products at airport (with photo).”

Customs and Excise Department: The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. 28

July 2015. www.customs.gov.hk/en/publication_press/press/index_id_1382.html.

clviii

“Hong Kong Customs Seizes Suspected Ivory Products at Airport (with Photos).” Customs and Excise

Department: The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. 3 Nov. 2015. www.customs.

gov.hk/en/publication_press/press/index_id_1455.html.

clix

“Hong Kong Customs seizes suspected ivory products at airport (with photos).” Customs and Excise

Department: The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. 17 April 2016. www.

customs.gov.hk/en/publication_press/press/index_id_1586.html.

clx

“Customs Seized Smuggled Ivory Worth 22.80 Million Baht.” Suvarnabhumi

Airport Cargo Clearance Customs Bureau. www.customs-ccs.com/index.php?option=com_

content&view=article&id=338&Itemid=28&lang=th.

clxi

Ibid.

clxii Ibid.

clxiii “Thailand seizes half-tonne of ivory from Kenya.” Agence France-Presse. 17 July 2012. www.

thephuketnews.com/thailand-seizes-half-tonne-of-ivory-from-kenya-32080.php.

clxiv Momanyi, Bernard. “Airport staff suspects in Sh130m ivory probe.” Capital News. 6 May 2011. www.

capitalfm.co.ke/news/2011/05/airport-staff-suspects-in-shm-ivory-probe/.

clxv Ibid.

clxvi Ibid.

clxvii Ibid.

clxviii Ibid.

clxix Momanyi, Bernard. “700kgs of ivory netted in Kenya.” Capital News. 22 June 2012. http://www.

capitalfm.co.ke/news/2012/06/700kgs-of-ivory-netted-in-kenya/.

clxx Ibid.

clxxi Ibid.

clxxii “男子走私市值140万美元黑犀牛角被查遭严惩(图)” China News Network. 17 Jan. 2014. www.

chinanews.com/gj/2014/01-17/5750568.shtml.

clxxiii

“Thailand Rhino Horns.” AP Archive. The Associated Press, 20 June 2014. www.aparchive.com/

metadata/youtube/4081ad2f16c3885f5ec7edb366f7deef.

clxxiv “Thailand Rhino Horns.” AP Archive. The Associated Press, 20 June 2014. www.aparchive.com/

metadata/youtube/4081ad2f16c3885f5ec7edb366f7deef.

107

Flying Under the Radar

clxxv “Customs Officials Confiscate Rhino Horns at ORTIA.” SARS. 23 Dec. 2015. www.sars.gov.za/

Media/MediaReleases/Pages/23-December-2015---Customs-officials-confiscate-rhino-horns-at-ORTIA.aspx.

clxxvi Ibid.

clxxvii Ibid.

clxxviii Ndlazi, Sakhile. “Tusks of R17m Seized.” Pretoria News. 3 March 2016. www.pressreader.com/south-

africa/pretoria-news/20160303/281479275501302

clxxix Moseley, Brandon. “Rhino Poachers Indicted in Montgomery.” Alabama Political Reporter. www.

alreporter.com/rhino-poachers-indicted-in-montgomery/.

clxxx Kous, Dima Abo. “Smuggled Cobras Rescued at Cairo Airport Thanks to Our Trainings.”

International Fund for Animal Welfare. 9 May 2016. www.ifaw.org/united-states/news/smuggled-cobras-

rescued-cairo-airport-thanks-our-trainings.

clxxxi

“Workshop on Illegal Wildlife Trade Held in Islamabad.” Islamabad Scene. 10 Feb. 2016. http://

islamabadscene.com/workshop-on-iillegal-wildlife-trade-held-in-islamabad/.

clxxxii “When ‘Mangoes’ Stirred to Life.” The Hindu. 29 April 2014. www.thehindu.com/news/cities/

Thiruvananthapuram/when-mangoes-stirred-to-life/article5959091.ece.

clxxxiii Ibid.

clxxxiv Ibid.

clxxxv Ibid.

clxxxvi Ibid.

clxxxvii “Trafic de Tortues de Madagascar.” Madagascar Tribune. 16 June 2010. http://mg.chm-cbd.net/news/

trafic-de-tortues-de-madagascar.

clxxxviii Davis, Kathleen. “Ketamine: Facts, Effects and Hazards.” Medical News Today. MediLexicon

International Ltd., 18 Nov. 2015. www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/302663.php.

clxxxix

“Most Frequently Used Drugs.” www.vetandwild.com/drugs.html.

cxc “On the Trail: Information and Analysis Bulletin on Animal Poaching and Smuggling | N°10 /

1st July – 30th September 2015.” Robin Des Bois. ROBIN DES BOIS. www.robindesbois.org/wp-content/

uploads/ON_THE_TR AIL _10.pdf.

cxci

“Malaysia Jails Man Who Smuggled 95 Snakes on a Plane.” BBC News. 9 Sep. 2010. www.bbc.com/

news/world-asia-pacific-11203270.

cxcii “Smuggler caught after bag holding 95 boa constrictors bursts open at airport.” The Guardian.

Guardian News and Media Limited. 3 Sep. 2010. www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/sep/03/

smuggler-boa-constrictors.

cxciii

Christy, Bryan. “Asia’s Wildlife Trade.” National Geographic. National Geographic Partners, LLC,

Jan. 2010. http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2010/01/asian-wildlife/christy-text.

cxciv Ibid.

108

Flying Under the Radar

cxcv Ibid.

cxcvi “Anson Wong.” Notable Ansons. 28 Aug. 2010. https://notableansons.blogspot.com/2010/08/

anson-wong.html.

cxcvii Lim, Balqis. “On the trail of wildlife smugglers.” News Straits Times. 24 Nov. 2013. https://

wildsingaporenews.blogspot.com/2013/11/on-trail-of-wildlife-smugglers.html.

cxcviii Chao, Steve. “Return of the Lizard King.” Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera Media Network, 21 April 2015. www.

aljazeera.com/programmes/101east/2013/11/return-lizard-king-2013111683648328719.html.

cxcix Neslen, Arthur. “Lizard traffickers exploit legal loopholes to trade at world’s biggest fair.” The

Guardian. Guardian News and Media Limited. 11 Nov. 2015. www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/

nov/11/lizard-traffickers-exploit-legal-loopholes-to-trade-at-worlds-biggest-fair.

Ibid.

cci Ibid.

ccii “Costa Rica police seize 170 wild animals from German tourist’s luggage.” The Tico Times. 9 Sep.

2014. www.ticotimes.net/2014/09/09/costa-rica-police-seize-170-wild-animals-from-german-tourists-luggage.

cciii Fendt, Lindsay. “German tourist busted at Costa Rica airport smuggling 400 animals is released with

no fine.” The Tico Times. 20 Sep. 2014. www.ticotimes.net/2014/09/20/german-tourist-busted-at-costa-rica-

airport-smuggling-400-animals-is-released-with-no-fine.

cciv

Hamilton, Megan. “Costa Rica Deports German Caught Smuggling Hundreds of Animals.” Digital

Journal. 20 Sep. 2014. www.digitaljournal.com/news/environment/costa-rica-deports-german-caught-

smuggling-hundreds-of-animals/article/404339.

ccv

Ibid.

ccvi “Costa Rica police seize 170 wild animals from German tourist’s luggage.” The Tico Times. 9 Sep.

2014. www.ticotimes.net/2014/09/09/costa-rica-police-seize-170-wild-animals-from-german-tourists-luggage.

ccvii Fendt, Lindsay. “German tourist busted at Costa Rica airport smuggling 400 animals is released with

no fine.” The Tico Times. 20 Sep. 2014. www.ticotimes.net/2014/09/20/german-tourist-busted-at-costa-rica-

airport-smuggling-400-animals-is-released-with-no-fine.

ccviii

Fendt, Lindsay. “German tourist busted at Costa Rica airport smuggling 400 animals is released with

no fine.” The Tico Times. 20 Sep. 2014. www.ticotimes.net/2014/09/20/german-tourist-busted-at-costa-rica-

airport-smuggling-400-animals-is-released-with-no-fine.

ccix

Ibid.

ccx Robinson, Julian. “Budgie Smuggling: Passenger Arrested at Cuba Airport with 66 Tiny Birds Sewn

into His Trousers after Customs Officer Spots ‘Bulge’.” DailyMail.com. Associated Newspapers Ltd., 3 June

2014. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2647135/Budgie-smuggling-Man-arrested-trying-enter-Cuba-66-tiny-

birds-sewn-trousers-customs-officer-spots-bulge.html.

ccxi

Ibid.

ccxii Stagno-Navarra, Karl. “Smuggled Birds Get Radiation Dose by Airport Security.” Malta Today. Media

109

Flying Under the Radar

Today Co. Ltd., 28 Feb. 2012. www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/national/16413/smuggled-birds-get-radiation-

dose-by-airport-security-20120228.

ccxiii

“Man Caught Carrying 200 Canaries at Airport.” Times of Malta.com. 21 Nov. 2009. www.

timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20091121/local/man-caught-carrying-200-canaries-at-airport.282637.

ccxiv Ibid.

ccxv Ibid.

ccxvi Ibid.

ccxvii Hsu, Christine. “Taiwan Finds 3rd Case of Deadly H5N1 Virus in Birds Smuggled from China.”

Medical Daily. IBT Media Inc., 17 July 2012. www.medicaldaily.com/taiwan-finds-3rd-case-deadly-h5n1-virus-

birds-smuggled-china-241383.

ccxviii

Ibid.

ccxix Ibid.

ccxx Ibid.

ccxxi Ibid.

ccxxii “On the Trail: Information and Analysis Bulletin on Animal Poaching and Smuggling | N°1 / 1st

April – 30th June 2013.” Robin Des Bois. ROBIN DES BOIS. www.robindesbois.org/wp-content/uploads/

ON-THE-TR AIL -1.pdf.

ccxxiii

Ibid.

ccxxiv Ibid.

ccxxv Ibid.

ccxxvi Malkin, Bonnie. “Man caught smuggling pigeons in his trousers.” The Telegraph. Telegraph Media

Group Limited. 3 Feb. 2009. http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01252/pigport_1252075f.jpg

ccxxvii Dell’Amore, Christine. “PHOTO: Smuggler Caught With 14 Birds in Pants.” National Geographic

News. National Geographic Society. 6 May 2009. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/05/090506-

bird-smuggling-picture.html

ccxxviii

TRAFFIC Bulletin Seizures and Prosecutions: March 1997 – October 2014. TRAFFIC. 2014

ccxxix “Man jailed for trying to smuggle peregrine falcon eggs out of Birmingham Airport.” Birmingham

Post. Birmingham Post. 30 May 2013. www.birminghampost.co.uk/news/local-news/man-jailed-trying-

smuggle-peregrine-3928774

ccxxx

“Rare birds found taped to passenger’s body at LAX.” LA Now. Los Angeles Times. 29 Aug. 2011.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/08/bird-smuggling.html

ccxxxi Longbottom, Wil. “The Man Packing a Dozen Peckers in His Pants: Traveller Arrested Smuggling Live

Hummingbirds in His Trousers.” DailyMail.com. Associated Newspapers Ltd., 27 Sep. 2011. www.dailymail.

co.uk/news/article-2042474/Traveller-arrested-trying-smuggle-live-HUMMINGBIRDS-special-pouches-sewn-

pants.html.

110

Flying Under the Radar

ccxxxii Ibid.

ccxxxiii Ibid.

ccxxxiv Ibid.

ccxxxv The examples mentioned in the Recommendations are not meant to be an exhaustive list of all

organizations working on these issues.

ccxxxvi “The Buckingham Palace Declaration.” 15 March 2016. www.unitedforwildlife.org/#!/2016/03/the-

buckingham-palace-declaration?_escaped_fragment_=.

ccxxxvii Ibid .

ccxxxviii CITES SC66 National Ivory Action Plan Progress Report. Convention on the International Trade

in Endangered Species, SC66, doc. 29, annex 9, Sep. 2015. https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/com/

sc/66/E-SC66-29-Annex9.pdf

ccxxxix

“WildScan.” Freeland. Freeland Foundation. www.freeland.org/programs/wildscan/.

ccxl Ibid.

ccxli “Legislation.” Tikki Hywood Trust. www.tikkihywoodtrust.org/legislation/.

ccxlii See www.cbp.gov/travel/travel-industry-personnel/carrier-liaison-prog for information regarding

CBP’s Carrier Liaison Program.

ccxliii See “A Review of Global Trends in CITES Live Wildlife Confiscations” for an assessment of current

CITES protocols for live wildlife seizures and associated recommendations. (D’Cruze, N, Macdonald DW.

“A Review of Global Trends in CITES Live Wildlife Confiscations.” Nature Conservation 15: 47-63, 22 Sep.

2016. doi: 10.3897/natureconser vation.15.10005.)

ccxliv

Actman, Jani. “What Happens to Smuggled Animals After They’re Seized?” National Geographic.

National Geographic Partners, LLC, 30 Sep. 2016. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/09/wildlife-

watch-animals-seized-smugglers/.

ccxlv

In one instance in 2015, Vietnamese officials seized “42 live, critically endangered” pangolins and

delivered them to forest rangers, presumably for rehabilitation. The forest rangers instead sold all 42 animals

to local restaurants, claiming that “the animals were too weak to be rescued anyway.” (Bryce, Emma. “Critically

Endangered Pangolins Rescued, Then Sold as Food.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media Limited,

20 Feb. 2015. www.theguardian.com/environment/world-on-a-plate/2015/feb/20/critically-endangered-

pangolins-rescued-then-sold-as-food.)

ccxlvi

Before Spain designated a rescue center to receive rescued wildlife, “some of its seized animals went

to a zoo now under investigation for ties to the illegal wildlife trade.” A nonprofit organization, Animal

Advocacy and Protection, is now Spain’s designated rescue center. According to Raquel Garcia, head of

public policy for the organization, “We bring [the animals] in, rehabilitate them if they’re social animals,

and make sure they’re placed in a legitimate location.” (Actman, Jani. “What Happens to Smuggled Animals

After They’re Seized?” National Geographic. National Geographic Partners, LLC, 30 Sep. 2016. http://news.

nationalgeographic.com/2016/09/wildlife-watch-animals-seized-smugglers/.)

ccxlvii

“Inside the Vault Holding 80 Tonnes of Illegal Ivory.” ITV. ITV PLC, 15 March 2016. www.itv.com/

news/2016-03-14/inside-the-warehouse-holding-80-tonnes-of-illegal-ivory/.

111

Flying Under the Radar

ccxlviii “Gaps in Data Place Thousands of Illegally Traded Wild Animals at Risk, Say Researchers.” University

of Oxford. 22 Sep. 2016. www.ox.ac.uk/news/2016-09-22-gaps-data-place-thousands-illegally-traded-wild-

animals-risk-say-researchers-1.

ccxlix

“South Africa seizes two Vietnamese with record 41kg of rhino horns.” Toi Tre News. 2 Nov. 2014.

http://tuoitrenews.vn/society/23744/south-africa-seizes-two-vietnamese-with-record-41kg-of-rhino-horns.

ccl Fishel, Justin, et. al. “EXCLUSIVE: Undercover DHS Tests Find Security Failures at US Airports.”

ABC News. 1 June 2015. http://abcnews.go.com/US/exclusive-undercover-dhs-tests-find-widespread-security-

failures/ story?id=31434881.

ccli

See http://www.customs.gov.hk/en/publication_press/press/index.html for Hong Kong press

releases.

cclii See http://www.sars.gov.za/Media/MediaReleases/Pages/default.aspx for South African press

releases

ccliii See http://www.customs.gov.hk/filemanager/common/pdf/statistics/enforcement_cases_en.pdf for

an example.

ccliv A May 2015 report undertaken on behalf of the Department of National Parks and Wildlife of