January 19, 2022

News

News Network

2019 END Wildlife Trafficking Report

19 min read

Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs

Eliminate, Neutralize, and Disrupt Wildlife Trafficking Act of 2016
PL 114-231, Sec. 201
2019 Report to Congress

The Eliminate, Neutralize, and Disrupt (END) Wildlife Trafficking Act (P.L. 114-231) (the Act) directs the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce, to submit to Congress a report that lists Focus Countries and Countries of Concern, as defined in the Act.

Wildlife trafficking remains a serious transnational crime that threatens security, economic prosperity, the rule of law, long-standing conservation efforts, and human health.  President Trump, in Executive Order 13773, called for a comprehensive and decisive approach to dismantle organized crime syndicates and specifically recognized the connection between wildlife trafficking and transnational criminal organizations.

The Task Force on Wildlife Trafficking (Task Force), co-chaired by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Interior, and the Attorney General, brings together 17 federal departments and agencies to implement the National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking (the “National Strategy”).  The USG’s three-pronged approach to combating wildlife trafficking – strengthening law enforcement, reducing demand, and building international cooperation – deprives criminals of a key source of financing, reducing the criminal threat posed to U.S. citizens.

The Task Force’s work to combat wildlife trafficking is making a difference on the ground at home and worldwide.  Task Force efforts and activities are better coordinated across the USG:  efficiencies are identified and exploited, redundancies eliminated, and resources used more strategically; international outreach continues to expand; and improved intelligence has identified new areas of work.  Working in partnership with the private sector, local communities, and NGOs, the United States has led the way globally, securing agreements and commitments from governments and stakeholders at all levels to take urgent action.  Highlights of Task Force efforts are included in the separate Strategic Review, as called for in Sec. 301(d) of the END Wildlife Trafficking Act.

In order to improve accountability and reporting on strategy implementation, the Task Force developed 14 indicators for monitoring USG-supported actions to address wildlife trafficking in Focus Countries.  Ten indicators measure inputs, outputs, or outcomes of law enforcement capacity building and cooperation efforts, policy reform, and demand reduction actions tailored to each country.  Four indicators measure dimensions of how seriously wildlife crime is perceived or addressed in each country.  Task Force members will establish baseline measures for applicable indicators in 2019 and 2020 and will set targets for a subset of indicators to track moving forward.  Indicators monitored in 2019 will be reported in the 2020 Strategic Review.

Focus Countries

Methodology for Determining Original 26 Focus Countries

The Department of State worked closely with the other agencies of the Task Force to employ both qualitative and quantitative information to identify Focus Countries and Countries of Concern, as defined in Section 2 of the Act, for the 2017 END Act Report.  Technical experts and scientists from Task Force agencies established a process to analyze wildlife trafficking information and gathered a set of relevant and available data.  This analysis included evaluation of data drawn from public reporting by USG agencies, international entities such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, and the UN Office of Drugs and Crime, as well as NGOs such as the Center for Advanced Defense Studies, TRAFFIC, the Environmental Investigation Agency, and Transparency International.  Information from the required national assessments reinforced and augmented our previous findings.

Task Force agencies, including those represented at U.S. missions overseas, reviewed the initial analysis and provided additional information that was often only available locally.  These country-specific analyses helped to round out the global data, including by providing information on additional species such as felines, primates, and marine species.  Agencies also considered the trajectory of wildlife populations and trafficking’s impact on that trajectory, government and private sector efforts to prevent illegal trade, and the presence of legal or poorly regulated domestic markets for species threatened by wildlife trafficking.

The Task Force further evaluated whether governments had recently taken steps to improve legislation, regulations, and/or enforcement and other trends such that the country is stepping up its efforts to combat the illegal trade in wildlife.

2019 Focus Countries

The Department of State, in consultation with the Departments of the Interior and Commerce, and with USAID, agreed that all of the countries listed as Focus Countries in the 2018 END Act Report should remain.  Each country previously listed continues to be a “major source of wildlife trafficking products or their derivatives, a major transit point of wildlife trafficking products or their derivatives, or a major consumer of wildlife trafficking products,” and designation appears to have contributed to increased attention to combating wildlife trafficking in some Focus Countries.

Consistent with Section 301 of the END Act, U.S. missions in each Focus Country developed a strategic plan, based on the U.S. mission assessment of wildlife trafficking within that country.  U.S. agencies used the strategic plans to guide and coordinate USG approaches and responses to the needs and gaps identified in the Assessment.  The Task Force co-chairs, along with USAID, developed and distributed templates for both the Assessments and Strategic Plans.  All Task Force agencies, both at post and in Washington, were invited to contribute to their development.  The Task Force reviewed for completeness and consistency, recognizing variability based on location in the supply chain, resources within the U.S. Mission, and previous engagement in the issue.

During the past year, U.S. missions in all 26 previously identified Focus Countries completed their Assessments and Strategic Plans.  Together these documents provide an overview of the issues related to wildlife trafficking in that country, identify key areas for strategic intervention by the USG, and either establish a new platform or support existing structures within the mission to guide a coordinated, “whole of USG” approach to interventions.  In some cases, the development of the National Strategy brought together for the first time all USG resources and agencies working in this arena, providing a clear view of the entire landscape of USG support.  For some, the assessments and strategies offered the opportunity to elevate wildlife trafficking as an important security and economic issue, not only within the mission but also within the respective host government.

To assess new potential Focus Countries, the Task Force analyzed a compilation of seizure information derived from government data sets, popular media reports, and other sources that reflect reported illegal wildlife trade seizures around the world.  The analysis focused on data from 2013 to the present for CITES-listed species.  Countries were then ranked by total number of reported seizures, and nine new countries were identified for further review.  The Task Force then requested additional information from the U.S. missions in those countries and jurisdictions.  The additional information was reviewed to determine whether other countries should be added.  This process resulted in adding the following to the list:  Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and Zimbabwe.  The Task Force will work with each mission to complete the required Assessment and Strategy over the course of FY 2020.

This determination is based on our analysis of the statutory criteria in the END Act and does not reflect a positive or negative judgment of the listed countries or indicate that these countries are not working diligently to combat wildlife trafficking.  Indeed, the United States has longstanding partnerships with many of these countries with respect to combating wildlife trafficking and recognizes the strong political will that already exists in many of these countries to tackle this problem.  The Department of State and other Task Force agencies look forward to continuing close and constructive relationships with these countries as we work collaboratively to combat wildlife trafficking.

2019 Focus Country List (in alphabetical order)

  • Bangladesh
  • Brazil
  • Burma
  • Cambodia
  • Cameroon
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo
  • Gabon
  • Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
  • India
  • Indonesia
  • Kenya
  • Laos
  • Madagascar
  • Malaysia
  • Mexico
  • Mozambique
  • Nigeria
  • People’s Republic of China
  • Philippines
  • Republic of the Congo
  • South Africa
  • Tanzania
  • Thailand
  • Togo
  • Uganda
  • United Arab Emirates
  • Vietnam
  • Zimbabwe

Countries of Concern

Methodology for Identifying Countries of Concern

To identify Countries of Concern as directed by Section 201(b) of the Act, the Department of State, in consultation with the Departments of the Interior and Commerce and other agencies of the Task Force, reviewed publicly available information as well as classified material that indicated the following governments actively engaged in or knowingly profited from the trafficking of endangered or threatened species.  A review of classified, NGO, and open source reporting found insufficient evidence to designate new Countries of Concern.  The situation in the Countries of Concern designated in 2017 remains largely unchanged.  This designation does not indicate that all parts of the government are or have been involved in wildlife trafficking, but there are serious concerns that either high-level or systemic government involvement has occurred.

2019 Countries of Concern (in alphabetical order)

  • Democratic Republic of the Congo
  • Laos
  • Madagascar

Note that this list includes both countries and jurisdictions

 

For more information on U.S. Government efforts in combating wildlife trafficking, please see:

2019 END Wildlife Trafficking Strategic Review

News Network

  • Judiciary Steps Up Calls to Enact Security Measures
    In U.S Courts
    Citing the latest act of violence this year, in which a judge's family and officers at two federal courthouses have come under attack, the Judiciary has stepped up its call to congressional leaders for a series of safety measures “to protect the safety of the public at our nation’s courthouses.”
    [Read More…]
  • The Opening of the Israeli Embassy in the United Arab Emirates
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Antony J. Blinken, [Read More…]
  • Alcoa to Clean Up Remaining Surface Contamination at Former East St. Louis Aluminum Plant Under Federal Settlement
    In Crime News
    Alcoa Corporation and Howmet Aerospace, successors to Alcoa Incorporated, and the City of East St. Louis, Illinois, will clean up hazardous waste disposal sites surrounding Alcoa’s former aluminum manufacturing plant in East St. Louis to resolve federal liability.
    [Read More…]
  • Rewards for Justice – Reward Offer for Information on the Murder of Avijit Roy and Attack on Rafida Bonya Ahmed
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Office of the [Read More…]
  • Colombian Businessman Charged with Money Laundering Extradited to the United States from Cabo Verde
    In Crime News
    Alex Nain Saab Moran (Saab), 49, a Colombian citizen, will make his initial appearance in federal court in Miami, Florida, today after being extradited from the Republic of Cabo Verde. Saab is charged in an indictment with laundering the proceeds of violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) in connection with a scheme to pay bribes to take advantage of Venezuela’s government-controlled exchange rate. He is expected to make his initial court appearance today at 1:00 p.m. before U.S. Magistrate Judge John J. O’Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
    [Read More…]
  • Secretary Blinken’s Travel to Paris and Mexico City
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Ned Price, Department [Read More…]
  • Finalists Announced for 2021 P3 Impact Award
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Office of the [Read More…]
  • Mortality in Local Jails, 2000-2018 – Statistical Tables
    In Justice News
    (Publication)
    This report presents detailed statistical tables on mortality in local jails. It provides information on cause of death; decedent characteristics, and mortality rates of inmate populations.
    4/29/2021, NCJ 256002, E. Ann Carson [Read More…]
  • Former coach charged with distributing pornographic images of children
    In Justice News
    A 44-year-old Rockport [Read More…]
  • Attorney General William P. Barr Announces the Appointment of Gregg N. Sofer as the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Texas
    In Crime News
    Attorney General William [Read More…]
  • Secretary Blinken’s Call with Afghanistan High Council for National Reconciliation Chair Dr. Abdullah
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Office of the [Read More…]
  • Countering Violent Extremism: DHS Can Further Enhance Its Strategic Planning and Data Governance Efforts
    In U.S GAO News
    What GAO Found DHS's 2019 Strategic Framework for Countering Terrorism and Targeted Violence and the related plans—collectively referred to as the strategy—outline the department's vision for all DHS counterterrorism activities. In prior work, GAO has identified seven elements of a comprehensive strategy. GAO found that DHS's strategy contains some but not all of the key elements (see figure). For example, GAO found that DHS's strategy included a mission statement, and a set of goals that were in turn linked to objectives and priority actions. However, the strategy did not include a discussion of external factors such as how the economy, demographics, or emerging technologies may affect the department in meeting its goals. By identifying and assessing such external factors, DHS would be better positioned to proactively mitigate such factors or plan for contingencies, if needed. Extent to Which DHS's Strategy for Countering Terrorism and Targeted Violence Included the Seven Elements of a Comprehensive Strategy DHS has taken some steps to establish a data governance framework, which helps ensure that an agency's data assets are transparent, accessible, and of sufficient quality to support its mission. For example, DHS established a data governance council to manage various data priority areas, however it has not yet completed actions to include targeted violence and terrorism prevention data into its department-wide framework. DHS has already identified some data challenges, such as the lack of comprehensive, national-level statistics on terrorism and targeted violence that underscore the need for a data governance framework. By incorporating targeted violence and terrorism prevention data into its broader data governance framework, DHS would be better able to leverage data to support and inform its prevention efforts, including building effective policy to address the threats and trends it identifies in the data. Why GAO Did This Study Data collected through the Extremist Crime Database show that there were 81 fatal violent extremist attacks in the United States from 2010 through 2020, resulting in 240 deaths. Since 2010, DHS has developed strategic initiatives that address targeted violence and terrorism prevention, which include efforts to counter violent extremism, among other things. GAO was asked to review DHS's longer-term efforts to prevent terrorism and targeted violence. This report examines the extent to which (1) DHS's 2019 strategy to address targeted violence and terrorism prevention includes key elements of a comprehensive strategy, and (2) DHS has developed a data governance framework to help implement its strategy. GAO reviewed DHS documentation and compared DHS's strategy to identified elements of a comprehensive strategy, and compared DHS's efforts to develop a data governance framework to federal requirements for implementing data governance.
    [Read More…]
  • Offshore Oil Spills: Additional Information is Needed to Better Understand the Environmental Tradeoffs of Using Chemical Dispersants
    In U.S GAO News
    What GAO Found When an oil spill occurs, responders have several options to manage the environmental effects, including using chemical dispersants (see figure). Chemical dispersants used on a surface oil slick can be effective at breaking up floating oil, which can help prevent the oil from reaching shore and harming sensitive ecosystems, according to studies GAO reviewed and stakeholders GAO interviewed. However, the effectiveness of applying dispersants below the ocean surface—such as in response to an uncontrolled release of oil from a subsurface wellhead—is not well understood for various reasons. For example, measurements for assessing effectiveness of dispersants applied at the subsurface wellhead during the Deepwater Horizon oil spill had limitations and were inconclusive. In addition, there are limited experimental data on the effectiveness of subsurface dispersants that reflect conditions found in the deep ocean. Application of Chemical Dispersants at the Surface by Aircraft and Boat Chemically dispersed oil is known to be toxic to some ocean organisms, but broader environmental effects are not well understood. Dispersants themselves are considered significantly less toxic than oil, but chemically dispersing oil can increase exposure to the toxic compounds in oil for some ocean organisms, such as early life stages of fish and coral. Other potentially harmful effects of chemically dispersed oil, especially in the deep ocean, are not well understood due to various factors. These factors include laboratory experiments about the toxicity of chemically dispersed oil that use inconsistent test designs and yield conflicting results, experiments that do not reflect ocean conditions, and limited information on organisms and natural processes that exist in the deep ocean. Since the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the U.S. Coast Guard, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and other agencies have taken some actions to help ensure decision makers have quality information to support decisions on dispersant use. For example, the Coast Guard and EPA have assessed the environmental effects of using dispersants on a surface slick. However, they have not assessed the environmental effects of the subsurface use of dispersants. By assessing the potential environmental effects of the subsurface use of dispersants, the Coast Guard and EPA could help ensure that decision makers are equipped with quality information about the environmental tradeoffs associated with decisions to use dispersants in the deep ocean. Why GAO Did This Study In April 2010, an explosion onboard the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico resulted in 11 deaths and the release of approximately 206 million gallons of oil. During the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, responders applied dispersants to the oil slick at the ocean surface as well as at the wellhead more than 1,500 meters below the surface. The subsurface use of dispersants was unprecedented and controversial. GAO was asked to review what is known about the use of chemical dispersants. This report examines, among other things, what is known about the effectiveness of dispersants, what is known about the effects of chemically dispersed oil on the environment, and the extent to which federal agencies have taken action to help ensure decision makers have quality information to support decisions on dispersant use. GAO reviewed scientific studies, laws, regulations, and policies. GAO also interviewed agency officials and stakeholders from academia and industry.
    [Read More…]
  • FBI Employee Indicted for Illegally Removing National Security Documents, Taking Material to Her Home
    In Crime News
    An employee of the FBI’s Kansas City Division has been indicted by a federal grand jury for illegally removing numerous national security documents that were found in her home.
    [Read More…]
  • 10th Anniversary of the Revolution in Tunisia
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Michael R. Pompeo, [Read More…]
  • On the Occasion of World Refugee Day
    In Human Health, Resources and Services
    Michael R. Pompeo, [Read More…]
  • Secretary Antony J. Blinken and Attorney General Merrick Garland, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, Mexican Foreign Secretary Marcelo Ebrard, Mexican Security Secretary Rosa Icela Rodriguez, and Mexican Interior Secretary Adan Augusto Lopez Hernandez Remarks Before the U.S.-Mexico High-Level Security Dialogue
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Antony J. Blinken, [Read More…]
  • International Finance: Treasury Has Reduced the Number of Attaches Overseas
    In U.S GAO News
    The number of financial attaches that the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) deploys overseas dropped from approximately 30 in 1981 to 7 at the beginning of fiscal year 2005. Treasury has traditionally used financial attaches to monitor and gather information on international economic and financial developments to help shape U.S. international economic policy and to promote U.S. national interests. These attaches are part of the U.S. mission overseas and are typically stationed in U.S. embassies in key countries. Since at least 1981, however, the number of financial attaches placed overseas has been declining in response to changing conditions. Due to congressional interest in these financial attaches, this report describes (1) the role of financial attaches and (2) the process Treasury uses to determine attache placement. In commenting on this report, Treasury considered our report to be fair and accurate. Both Treasury and the Department of State provided technical comments, which we incorporated where appropriate.Financial attaches represent Treasury overseas and cover economic and financial issues relevant to U.S. international economic policies and U.S. national interests, although the role and need for financial attaches have evolved. Specifically, financial attaches conduct monitoring and analysis of macroeconomic and financial issues, including those affecting the private sector. Typically, financial attaches interact with host government financial agencies such as the ministries of finance and central banks, as well as with private sector financial entities. Financial attaches typically work in conjunction with the Economic Section of the U.S. mission and usually share the information they collect with other U.S. agencies. In Afghanistan and Iraq, financial attaches are primarily involved in coordinating economic reconstruction efforts. In general, the role of attaches has evolved over time due to changing Treasury priorities, as well as factors such as technological advances in communications. To some extent, these changes have reduced the necessity for some financial attache posts overseas. Treasury has recently begun to formalize its process for determining attache placement. Previously, the placement of Treasury's attaches was accomplished through an informal process, according to Treasury officials. More recently, Treasury has taken steps to formalize its process by specifying placement criteria it will take into consideration relative to overall Treasury priorities. These criteria include whether the United States has major financial interest in a country or whether there is significant U.S. engagement in a country. However, Treasury officials stated that budget constraints have been a primary factor in determining the number of attaches in recent years. Furthermore, projected rising costs are likely to constrain the number of attaches in the future.
    [Read More…]
  • Visit of Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa Feltman to Ethiopia and Kenya
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Office of the [Read More…]
  • Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division Adam Hickey Delivers Remarks at the ACI 2nd National Forum on FARA
    In Crime News
    Over the last few years, a conventional wisdom has developed about the arc of FARA enforcement.  It goes a little something like this: In the beginning, Congress created FARA. Then DOJ rested.  For nearly 80 years, it was not enforced, carried no penalties, and was largely ignored.  Beginning in 2017, the Special Counsel’s Office used the statute to investigate and charge Russian Internet trolls and politically influential Americans alike.  Suddenly, this vague statute transformed from an administrative afterthought into an unpredictable source of criminal liability.  FARA registrations skyrocketed, and conferences of white collar defense attorneys organized soon thereafter. 
    [Read More…]
Network News © 2005 Area.Control.Network™ All rights reserved.