Upload
lediep
View
220
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
WORLD TRADE IN CROCODILIANSKINS, 1990-1991
Prepared under contract to the International
Alligator and Crocodile Trade Study
by
The World Conservation
Monitoring Centre
May 1994
LkJA\ 1&W 11W
WORLD TRADE IN CROCODILIANSKINS, 1990-1991
Prepared under contract
to the International Alligator and Crocodile Trade Study
by
Richard Luxmoore and Lorraine Collins
May 1994
Wildlife Trade Monitoring Unit
World Conservation Monitoring Centre
219 Huntingdon Road
Cambridge CB3 ODLUnited Kingdom
INTRODUCTION
Two previous reports for the International Alligator and Crocodile Trade Study have examined the world trade
in crocodilian skins from 1980 to 1987. The present report is intended to analyse new information for 1988
to 1991, retaining information from previous years for comparative purposes. Because of the interaction
between the trade in classic skins (alligators and true crocodiles) and the caiman skin trade, it was decided to
include data on the latter, representing, as they do, the greater proportion of the world's crocodilian skin trade.
METHODS
This report is based on an analysis of the annual reports submitted by the Parties to CITES for the years 1988
to 1991. A list of annual reports received at the time of writing is given in Table 1. In order to be comparable
with previous IACTS reports, all trade in whole skins and sides of crocodilian species was analysed. One skin
was taken to comprise two sides. Trade reported in units of weight, area or length was excluded. Where the
number of skins reported by the importing country was different from the number reported by the exporting
country, the higher of the two quantities was used. Gross exports from all countries were summed to show the
gross world trade. Net imports, taken as the positive difference between gross imports and gross exports, were
summed to give the net world trade. The quantity of skins originating in the major source countries within
the range of each species was estimated by calculating net world trade for each reported country of origin (or
export, where no origin was declared). This was slightly different from previous IACTS studies which used
gross trade; however, many countries re-export substantial quantities of skins and so the net trade was
considered to give a more reliable estimate of the total quantity of skins in trade.
The difficulties of calculating net trade in Caiman skins are discussed in the relevant section of the report.
Exports of manufactured products (wallets, watchstraps, handbags, pairs of shoes, leather items, belts and
garments) of this species from Europe were also analysed.
Table 1. CITES annual reports for 1988, 1989, 1990, and 1991 available in the database for this analysis.
Country 1988 1989 1990 1991
Algeria
Argentina
Australia
Austria
Bahamas
Bangladesh
Belgium
Bermuda
Bolivia
Botswana
Brazil
Cameroon
Canada
Cayman Is
Central African Rep
Chile
China
Colombia
Congo
Costa Rica
Denmark
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Ethiopia
Finland
France
Gabon
Germany, FRGerman DRGhana
Greece
Greenland
Guatemala
Guinea
Guyana
Hong KongHungary
India
Indonesia
Iran
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Japan
Jordan
Kenya
Liberia
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
* *
* * *
* * * *
* * *
* *
* * * *
* * *
*
* * * *
* * *
* * *
* * * *
* * *
* *
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * *
* * * *
* *
* * * *
* *
* * * *
* * * *
* * *
* *
*
* *
* * * *
* *
* * * *
* *
* * *
* *
* * * *
* *
* * * *
* * * *
* *
* * * *
* * *
* * E S* * * *
* * *
* * * *
*
* * * *
* * * *
Country 1988 1989 1990 1991
Madagascar * * *
Malawi * *
Malaysia * * * *
Malta * * * *
Mauritius * * * *
Monaco * * * *
Morocco * * * *
Mozambique * * * *
Nepal * * * *
Netherlands * * * *
New Zealand * * *
Nicaragua * * * *
Niger * * *
Nigeria * *
Norway * * * *
Pakistan * * *
Panama * * * *
Papua New Guinea * * *
Paraguay * * * *
Philippines * *
Portugal * * * *
Rwanda *
Senegal * *
Singapore * * * *
South Africa * * * *
Spain * * * *
Sri Lanka * * *
St Lucia * *
Sudan * * *
Suriname * * * *
Sweden * * * *
Switzerland * * * *
Tanzania * * * *
Thailand *
Togo * * *
Trinidad & Tobago * * * *
Tunisia * * * *
UK * * * *
Uruguay * *
USA * * * *
Russian Federation * * *
Vanuatu * *
Venezuela * * * *
Zaire * * * *
Zambia * *
Zimbabwe * * * *
E Exports only
S Trade in skins only, no manufactured products
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2010 with funding from
UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge
http://www.archive.org/details/worldtradeincroc94luxm
Crocodylus acutus American crocodile
A total of only 60 skins of C. acutus was recorded in trade in 1988 and 1989, they were reported as exports
by Switzerland as pre-Convention stock or originating in Argentina, a country outside the range of the species.
Table 2. Minimum world trade in Crocodylus acutus skins
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Gross 599 106 573 27 4 1 59
Net 599 106 573 27 4 1 59
Table 3. Minimum gross trade in Crocodylus acutus skins reported as exported from or originating in countries
in which the species occurs
Origin 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Belize 1
Guatemala 1 1
Mexico 1 1 521 1
Unknown 8 3
Crocodylus cataphractus African Sharp-nosed or Slender-snouted Crocodile
Table 4. Minimum world trade in Crocodylus cataphractus skins
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Gross 12679 2030 59 11 149 1193 570 544 459
Net 7615 2030 149 1193 570 544 459
Table 5. Minimum net trade in Crocodylus cataphractus skins reported as exported from or originating in
countries in which the species occurs
Origin 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Congo 4967 2030 9 1193 559 554 459
Gabon 2044 1
Nigeria 149 11
Sierra Leone 1
Zaire 57
Unknown 2
The population of C. cataphractus in Congo was transferred to Appendix II in 1987 subject to an annual quota
of 600. Exports were reported as 559 in 1989, 544 in 1990, and 459 in 1991. It thus seems that skins from
the 1988 and 1989 quotas were not exported until the following years. All were imported by France. The only
other skins noted were 11 from Nigeria, seized on entry into the USA in 1989.
Crocodylus johnsoni Australian Freshwater Crocodile
Table 6. Minimum world trade in C. johnsoni skins
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Gross 624 157 833 1281 904 993 895
Net 624 157 824 1274 794 988 884
The first recent exports of skins of C. johnsoni were authorised in 1987, after which they rose to a net figure
of 1274 in 1988 and declined to a net figure of 884 in 1991. Almost all of the exports were to Japan in 1988.
One as yet unsolved mystery is the reported import to the USA of 608 skins of C. johnsoni from Mali in 1987
and a further 34 skins in 1988 - both presumably errors, but it is strange that they should have been repeated
in successive years. Singapore was the largest importer of skins in both 1990 and 1991, the percentage of gross
trade being 60% and 85% respectively. Exports to Japan accounted for 40% in 1990 and 13% in 1991.
Crocodylus moreletii Morelet's Crocodile
A total of 28 C. moreletii skins were reported between 1988 and 1991, almost all as illegal imports to the USAfrom Mexico or Honduras.
Crocodylus niloticus Nile Crocodile
Table 7. Minimum world trade in C. niloticus
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Gross 34879 6510 10533 19507 23548 31253 46480 43306 57892
Net 28983 6115 9378 18480 22974 27526 41097 39701 48445
Minimum net trade in C. niloticus has risen from 61 15 in 1984 to 48,445 in 1991 (Table 7). There was a slight
drop in 1990 due largely to the reduction in exports from Madagascar in that year. The majority of skins in
1991, derived from the ranching programme in Zimbabwe but the other Appendix U populations in African
countries accounted for a further 8539 skins (Table 8). The main Appendix I skins traded have been from
captive breeding operations in South Africa, whose output has risen from 1905 skins in 1988 to 5296 in 1990
(Table 8). Appendix I imports have included 45 from Guinea Bissau, seized on entry to Spain; 1843 from Mali
reported to have been imported by France and 1842 imported by Japan, originating from Namibia. There is
no explanation of why France or Japan should have permitted these imports.
Most of the Appendix II imports have been within the agreed quotas (Table 9) but there were some notable
exceptions. In 1989 France recorded the import of 4542 skins from Madagascar, and Italy imported a further
376. As the total quota for 1989 was 1000 skins, the EC countries reported imports of nearly five times the
permitted quantity.
Imports from Malawi also exceeded the quota in 1989, but by a smaller margin. The excess appears to have
been due to the import of 500 skins reported by South Africa but not by Malawi.
In 1989 net trade of skins reported as originating in Sudan exceeded the quota by 1306. Sudan only reporting
one shipment to Germany of 1 128 skins. Belgium was the largest importer, recording 3995 skins, whilst Italy,
the third largest importer from Sudan, recorded 1010. In 1990 Sudan reported the export of 4121 skins,
however, imports of skins reported as originating from Sudan exceeded the quota by 1589. The excess is largely
derived from the reports of two of the importing countries: Belgium recorded the import of 3942 skins while
Sudan reported exporting 3200 and France recorded importing 829 skins, whilst Sudan reported exporting only
two skins.
Imports reported from Tanzania exceeded the quota in 1988, but this may have been due to the inclusion of
some skins from the previous year's quota. In 1990 France recorded the import of 1543 skins from Tanzania
of which Tanzania reported 1288. Even if the lower figure is taken; the quota has still been exceeded by 288.
Table 8. Minimum net trade in C. niloticus skins reported as exported from or originating in countries in
which the species occurs.
Origin 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Appendix I populations
Botswana* 2 4 10
Ethiopia 1
Guinea Bissau 45
Mali 1843
Namibia 1842
Nigeria 3 1 4
South Africa* 25 1905 4562 5296 3064
Unknown 10 1 7 5 60
Appendix II populations
Botswana 10 65 68 1890 882 698
Cameroon 3 2 2
Congo 332 649 150 150 10
Ethiopia 2075 7
Kenya 150 1400 2550 2296 1586
Madagascar 4 676 3610 3177 4928 885 989
Malawi 503 572 1829 2603 1070 1720
Mozambique 795 1707 590 485
Somalia 76
Sudan 2045 3453 3153 2526 6460 6629 854
Tanzania 763 1724 2316 1754 1555 982
Zambia 890 2954 3231 3738 2354 2296 1140
Zimbabwe 401 4272 5332 7217 7925 11607 14127 16678 34869
* ranching programme accepted
Table 9. Export quotas, excluding hunting trophies, for different populations of Crocodylus niloticus
transferred to Appendix II under the special criteria set out in Resolutions Conf. 5.21 and 7.14.
* ranching programme accepted W = Wild R = Ranched
I Population transferred to Appendix I
N Wild nuisance specimens
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994
Botswana W 2000 2000 2000 * * * * *
Cameroon W 20 100 100 100 I I
Congo W 1000 150 150 150 I I
Ethiopia W 20 20 20 * *
R 9300 8800 4500
Kenya W 150 1000 1000 1000 * *
R 4000 4000 4000 5000 6000 8000
Madagascar W 1000 1000 3784 1000 N 100 N 100 N 100
R 2000 3000 4000 4300
Malawi W 500 700 700 700 * * * * *
R 200 1000 1600
Mozambique W 1000 1000 1000 1000 * * * * *
R 3000
Somalia W 500 500 500
South Africa R 1000 1000 1000
Sudan W 5000 5000 5000 5000 5040 I I
Tanzania W 1000 2000 2000 2000 1000 1000 N400 N200 N200
R 4000 6000
Uganda R 2500 2500 2500
Zambia W 2000 2000 2000 2000 * * * * *
R 1350 3600 6200
Note: The quota for the Madagascan wild population in 1988 was increased from 1000 to 3784 by postal
procedures described in Notification to the Parties dated August 18, 1991. This was to allow the export of a
stockpile of skins. Similarly the 1992 quota for Sudan was also to enable the export of a stockpile of skins.
Table 10. Net imports of C. niloticus skins to major importing countries
* net exporter in this year
Importer 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Austria 196 148 151 468 1210 142 71
Belgium 595 195 3 1003 4012 3943 3
Botswana 359 * * *
France 7217 10543 19770 17390 25352 18186 28303
Germany, FR 23 426 303 349 * 1810 995
Italy 112 555 1609 4539 3188 1574 2775
Japan 284 1592 896 1456 4716 12831 6975
Singapore 6761
South Africa * 921 * 90 * * *
Spain * 273 * 62 * 6 5
Switzerland 242 1712 15 770 2206 307 1391
UK 632 * 10 147
USA 207 9 6 108 284 85 112
In 1991 the main importing country was France which took 49% of total world exports, the second largest
importer was Japan which received 12 % and the third largest, Singapore, received 11%. Most of the remaining
skins were imported by other European countries, notably Italy, Germany and Switzerland (Table 10).
Crocodylus novaeguineae New Guinea Crocodile
Table 11. Minimum world trade in C. novaeguineae skins
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Gross 34983 34539 49097 43599 40830 41725 57451 62260 36036
Net 27352 29156 43027 33938 37890 34728 42993 47674 32165
Table 12. Minimum net trade in C. novaeguineae skins reported as exported from or originating in countries
in which the species occurs.
Origin 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Indonesia 6975 7632 17331 5494 1227 10053 14314 19128 9627
Malaysia 115
PNG 29471 21987 27916 29465 32071 24397 27062 29682 22362*
Unknown 1106 592 3 59 426 85 1 173
*1991 Papua New Guinea Annual Report not available: data taken from other Annual Reports
Minimum net trade in skins of C. novaeguineae rose from 27,325 in 1983 to 47,674 in 1990. The majority
of these skins were reported to have originated in Papua New Guinea. The quota for Indonesia has been
increased from 20,000 in 1988 to 25,000 in 1991. There have been reports of a substantial illegal trade in skins
from Irian Jaya to Singapore which do not appear in the statistics. Singapore had taken out a reservation on
the species, but this was dropped in 1990. France was the largest importer of skins in 1989 with a gross figure
of 16,316; Japan recorded 14,426 and was the second largest importer. However, in 1990 imports by Japan
increased by over 50% to 31,405 and imports by France declined by over 50% to 7488. The 1991 figures for
gross and net world trade are lower than expected, but this may be due to the unavailability of the Papua NewGuinea annual report. France, one of the largest importers, reported importing only 2805 skins, and Japan
reported gross imports of 27,271, both down on the previous year. Singapore was the third largest importer in
1991, with a gross figure of 3546.
Crocodylus porosus Saltwater Crocodile
Table 13. Minimum world trade in C. porosus skins.
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Gross 7169 6431 8062 8183 7684 11303 17677 15838 16218
Net 5398 5358 6497 5752 7166 10042 15928 13036 14900
Table 14. Minimum net trade in C. porosus skins reported as exported from or originating in countries in
which the species occurs.
Origin 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Australia 100 98 400 499 1324 2634 2655 2865
Indonesia 345 200 1094 851 949 2670 4224 2095 2409
Malaysia 56 446 422
Papua New Guinea 4562 5239 5005 3910 6506 5758 8204 6910 8150
Philippines 1
Singapore 3 74 74 948 71 57 645
Thailand 300 14 400 450 450 350
Unknown 529 46 2 6 2 58
Table 15. Export quotas for the Indonesian population of Crocodylus porosus transferred to Appendix II under
the special criteria set out in Resolutions Conf. 5.21 and 7.14.
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
Wild 2000 2000 2000 4000 4000 3000 3000 2700
Ranched 2000 3000 7000
Minimum net trade in skins of C. porosus has increased from 5398 in 1983 to 15,928 in 1989. The totals for
1990 and 1991 are lower than net trade in 1989 due to the reduction in exports from Indonesia and Papua New
Guinea. Skins from Papua New Guinea have fluctuated from 3910 in 1986 to a peak of 8204 in 1989. Skins
from Indonesia have increased from 200 in 1984 to 4424 in 1989 (Table 14). The country's population of this
species was transferred to Appendix II in 1985 under a quota system, the quotas being shown in Table 15.
Exports from Australia have increased as the ranching programme has become a major skin producer. Japan
was the largest importer of skins in the period 1988-1991, France was the next most important destination
(Table 16). Switzerland increased its imports seven-fold from 1989 to 1990 but imports declined in 1991, a
possible reason is increased imports of C. niloticus skins in this year (Table 10). The volume of the unreported
trade is unknown but was estimated to be 30,000 - 40,000 a year for both C. porosus and C. novaeguineae
combined in 1987 (Ashley, 1989). Singapore held a reservation on this species until 1989 and so did not report
trade before then. It is to be expected that the withdrawal of reservations by Singapore will have reduced the
illegal trade.
Table 16. Net imports of C. porosus skins to major importing countries.
* Net exporter in this year
Importer 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
France 2531 4107 3437 2835 5425 1989 5946
Italy * * 134 * * * 21
Japan 3132 1346 3210 6347 8729 9853 7083
Singapore 231 * * 335 192 * 228
Switzerland 216 195 305 259 108 750 41
UK 362 * 26 22
USA 211 530 52 2
Crocodylus siamensis Siamese Crocodile
Table 17. Minimum world trade in C. siamensis skins
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Gross 800 351 663 981 2050 1715 2808 1400
Net 800 351 605 981 2050 1713 2808 1400
Exports of C. siamensis from Thailand grew from in 1983 to nearly 3000 in 1990. In 1989 all were said to
derive from the Samutprakan Crocodile Farm and all were imported to Japan, with the exception of 400 in 1988
and 600 in 1989, the latter being imported by Italy. Output from the farm was said to be 2700 in 1989
(Luxmoore, 1992). Japan was again the largest importer of skins in 1990, accounting for 85 % of gross trade.
Italy and the US imported the remaining skins. Since Thailand has not submitted an annual report for 1989,
all the trade was recorded by the importing countries for that year. All imports in 1991 were reported by Japan.
10
Alligator mississippiensis American Alligator
Most skins of Alligator mississippiensis which enter world trade are exported from the USA to Europe for
tanning and many are subsequently reimported to the USA. Since neither of the usual measures of CITES trade
(gross or net world trade) give an accurate estimate of the total production of skins, it is better to use gross
exports from the USA. These are shown in Table 18 where it can be seen that they have risen from 20,000
in 1983 to 146,000 in 1990. Gross US exports in the years 1988 to 1989, 1989 to 1990, and 1990 to 1991,
grew by 33%, 62% and 8.5% respectively. They originate mainly from Louisiana and Florida, from a
combination ofwild harvest, ranching and captive breeding. Alligator farming was established in 1989 in Texas
and Georgia and in 1990 total combined production for these two states was said to be 2649 skins (Luxmoore,
1992).
As in previous years, France and Italy have been the major destinations of skins, importing 69 % of gross
exports from the USA in 1991 (Table 19). Many skins are subsequently re-exported to the USA after tanning
but the total quantity of skins retained in France and Italy was 29,150 in 1988, 42,956 in 1989 and 75,382 in
1990, this represents over half the gross US exports. Japan is the third most important destination of US skins;
imports rose from 9324 in 1989 to 21,412 in 1991, 12% and 14% of gross US exports respectively.
Combined imports to both France and Italy have risen from 42,942 in 1988 to 98,687 in 1991 with France
importing the higher percentage for all years except 1991. Re-exports of skins from France and Italy to the US
have declined from 16,320 in 1989 to 10,042 in 1990, whereas exports of skins to other destinations has
increased from 4491 in 1989 to 9290 in 1990. The next largest destination of skins from France and Italy is
Switzerland; imports have increased from 2508 in 1989 to 7013 in 1990. Japanese imports from France have
increased from 162 in 1989 to 1778 in 1990.
Table 18. Exports of Alligator mississippiensis skins
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Gross US exports 21519 20718 33278 45184 51838 77810 125483 146829
Gross world trade 32388 29467 43843 57458 66707 100511 150962 184403
Net world trade 12968 13228 23907 33078 38705 61586 114735 133868
Table 19. Principal destinations of US exports of A. mississippiensis skins. The percentage of gross US
exports is shown in brackets.
Destination 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
France 10676 9236 9051 12947 28610 22989 38221 57211 40312
(53%) (43%) (43%) (39%) (63%) (44%) (49%) (45%) (30%)
Italy 3981 5393 5590 12708 9455 19953 25546 37503 58375
(20%) (25%) (27%) (38%) (21%) (38%) (32%) (30%) (39%)
11
Caiman crocodilus Spectacled Caiman
The calculation of trade in Caiman crocodilus skins is very much more difficult than for other species of
crocodilian because of the great variety of methods of reporting. Trade may be reported in any one of three
subspecies and as either skins or sides. There are several instances where the same trade has been recorded
as "skins" by the exporter and "sides" by the importer (or vice versa). Thus although the normal practice is
to divide the number of sides by two to obtain the number of skins, this cannot be relied on to reflect the trade
accurately. Total net trade calculated as above (and therefore subject to these limitations) has varied from 0.3
to 1.5 million between 1983 and 1989. Most of the trade in 1989, 1990 and 1991 is reported to have originated
in Colombia, Venezuela, and Nicaragua (Table 20). Up until 1990 Paraguay and Bolivia were also important
sources of skins. All of these countries except Paraguay have legal exports of skins and so the majority of trade
reported to CITES since 1988 appears to have been legal. The Paraguayan skins were mostly re-exported from
France to Switzerland and Tunisia with some skins being re-imported by France from Switzerland. Tunisia was
the largest destination of skins originating in Paraguay in 1989, importing 4048 skins from France. In 1990
trade in Paraguayan skins fell from 1 1,725 in 1989 to 642; 90% of this trade was re-exports of skins from Italy
to Switzerland. Nicaragua was the third largest source of skins in 1990 and 1991, presumably this resulted from
the introduction of management programmes and the setting of export quotas (WCMC et at., 1993).
Until recently Brazil had prohibited all exports of wildlife since 1967 and yet there is known to be much illegal
hunting of caimans, particularly in the Pantanal in the south of the country. Skins are exported by a variety
of routes but a large number have been intercepted in Paraguay. One large consignment was trans-shipped off
the coast of Uruguay and tracked to its destination in the Far East in (Anon., 1988). Another shipment was
intercepted in Belgium, en route from Argentina to Italy with false export documents (Anon., 1989). Aruba
and the Netherlands Antilles are also known to serve as an outlet for Brazilian skins from the north of the
continent, several hundred thousand skins having been located in warehouses there (Menghi, pers. comm.).
Most of these clearly do not appear in the CITES statistics and alternative means must be used to trace their
eventual destination. A recent revision of the regulation (Lei No. 5197) has permitted the export of Caiman
skins produced from ranching operations. In 1989 the Brazilian Government authorized 17 Caiman farms with
the proviso that animals must be kept for 6 months before being sold (Luxmoore, 1992). In 1990 legal net trade
in skins was 265, the majority being exported to the USA.
Europe is the major destination of Caiman skins recorded in CITES annual reports, Italy and France being the
main importing countries (Table 21). However, there is believed to be a large volume of trade which is not
recorded in these statistics. Pani (unpublished report, 1991) documented several instances where skins of
Caiman crocodilus have been intercepted on import to Italy with inaccurate or forged documentation and
believed that many more illegal shipments entered the country undetected. In September 1992 police seized
50,000 Caiman skins in Paraguay from a tannery in Luque, near Asuncion (Anon. 1992).
12
Table 20. Reported countries of origin of Caiman crocodilus skins derived from CITES annual reports, 1983-
1991.
Origin 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Argentina 8262 1668 1200 6000 54226 5654 1110 3831 105
Bolivia 43500 15325 171457 27352 24182 166164 13915 11039 2768
Brazil 835 7 265 30
Br Virgin Is 8000
Canada 1
Colombia 188094 108334 54644 35161 40708 82233 31168 91386 130405
Costa Rica 12 2000
Ecuador 2
El Salvador 27982 174947 207644 118602 20066 7375 8268 938 2106
France 28 4135 1 6
F Guiana 7887 489
Germany, FR 15 197 50
Guatemala 116234 349685 26288 12851 33341 8587 2513 12
Guyana 1130 72950 108408 41350 47905 76824 49289 10503 6632
Haiti 55
Honduras 41705 59466 7907 15865 40 2001
Hong Kong 6
Indonesia 130 379 267 1
Italy 300 50 632 140 194
Japan 13 1940 6
Korea, Rep. 409
Mexico 1 1 2
Nicaragua 1 246 210 863 100 75 15050 29283
Nigeria 187
Panama 85155 18378 23845 253 66 76 210 353
PNG 4269 5
Paraguay 909303 700028 212273 143635 45357 53707 11725 642 6
Peru 235 2855
Singapore 15867 105393 37413
S. Africa 4 1 183 150
Spain 4
Suriname 39 1 1
Switzerland 1076
Taiwan 152 1133 1382
Thailand 1
UK 5151 154
USA 3200 635 972 8
Venezuela 3487 125566 128095 73990 224650 170347 204206 150138
Vietnam 400
Zimbabwe 28
Unknown 85906 79398 113711 58134 24891 86944 2176 41 821
TOTAL 1366402 1334548 1442868 606202 464440 794765 296917 342922 322956
13
Table 21. Minimum net imports of Caiman crocodilus skins to EC countries.
Importer 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Av
Belgium 2955 183 39 397
Denmark 28 81 14
France 365828 275285 140912 42124 88570 7972 22359 54237 124661
Germany, FR 2200 32160 1478 2082 75 1 9653 5956
Greece 1161 385 429 234 276
Italy 292738 661404 236342 117947 160553 33494 100206 59966 207831
Netherlands 15000 897 9 1 1 1989
Portugal 102 147 234 110 74
Spain 13333 13722 25651 16242 4569 5582 6557 10707
UK 672 4934 5223 1027 5570 3180 16280 4611
Total 692,916 992,830 412,123 182,715 261,568 46,717 146,601 130,563 356,516
Table 22. Imports of crocodile skins (410112/4103.200-209) and crocodile leather (410512 and
410522/4107.210-201) recorded in Thailand Customs statistics (kg).
* January-October only.
1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
SKINS
Colombia 410 10444 17509 31108
PNG 4
Singapore 1975 817 2422 3956 2387 2912 8384 88029 5415 8215 9486
USA 540
Venezuela 10013 202997 43297 49654
Other 150 1413
TOTAL 1975 1357 2422 3956 2537 2912 8388 98452 21885( 70434 90248
LEATHER
Colombia 78 87 15 168 793 1790
Italy 103 15 2
Panama 90 70
Singapore 2449 1152 1105 1008 205 190 45 146 86 11 26 645 1755
S. Africa 78 285 8
USA 65 16 10
Venezuela 226 200 284
TOTAL 2449 1152 1454 1530 205 190 45 146 94 11 43 394 1654 3839
14
Retail shops in Singapore and Thailand have been reported to have huge quantities of caiman skin products on
sale and this trade may be facilitated by Singapore's having taken a reservation on Caiman crocodilus when it
joined CITES in 1987. The reservation was withdrawn on 1 February 1992.
Singapore Customs statistics no longer specify crocodile skins separately, mixing them instead with skins of fish
and other reptiles, but the Thai Customs statistics have a separate category for crocodile skins. These are
shown in Table 22. Both skin and leather are reported but skin is by far the greater quantity. Imports rose
rapidly from around 2-3 tonnes prior to 1985 to 219t in 1988. In the first ten months of 1990, some 90t were
imported. The main sources have been Colombia, Singapore and Venezuela, suggesting that the skins have been
of Caiman crocodilus rather than another species of crocodilian.
Thailand reports its overseas trade by country of origin rather than country of consignment and it is possible
that the skins represent re-exports rather than direct exports from Venezuela or Colombia. CITES statistics
record few exports of crocodilian skins to Thailand, although there were 14,000 in 1988, 1098 in 1989 and 3
in 1990. It would appear that the remainder of the trade has taken place entirely outside CITES control. There
is no reliable way to convert the trade reported by weight to numbers of skins because much depends on the
cut and method of preservation. Dixon et al. (1988) estimated that the mean weight of Caiman crocodilus skins
imported to Japan was 260g and, using this figure, the Customs statistics suggest imports of about 840,000 skins
in 1988, 277,000 in 1989 and over 362,000 skins in 1990. This is far in excess of the legal trade reported to
CITES. On the 22nd April 1991, after receiving numerous complaints from other Parties regarding Thailand's
failure to implement CITES, the Secretariat recommended a trade ban (Anon. 1991). The Thai trade ban was
: lifted on 2 April 1992 after the approval of wildlife laws which would permit full implementation of CITES
i
(Anon. 1992b)
Most of the skins imported to Europe are manufactured into leather goods for use within Europe or for export.
Net exports of the main categories of manufactured products from Italy and France in 1989 to 1991 are given
in Tables 23-29, showing the declared countries of origin. From 1990 to 1991, France exported a total of
914,219 watchstraps, 253 pairs of shoes, 418 handbags, 21,398 leather items, 102 garments and 6,672 belts.
Total combined exports in all of these commodities have declined over these two years when compared to the
period 1989 to 1990. The Italian Annual Report data for manufactured products was not available for 1991,
I
therefore the figures were calculated using import records from other CITES Parties. Italy exported 4,372
wallets, 149,409 watchstraps, 151,887 pairs of shoes, 10,138 handbags, 82,986 leather items, 859 garments
1 and 32,183 belts. These figures too, are down compared to 1989/1990 exports.
It is difficult to predict with accuracy how many leather products can be manufactured from a given number
of skins and moreover a certain, possibly large, percentage of the products are retailed within Europe. Thus
there is little useful that can be said about the quantities of products exported. However, the proportions of
j
skins and products reported from different countries of origin are more instructive. The countries from which
the constituent skins were said to have originated bear some resemblance to those from which skins were
imported (Tables 30-31) but there are some differences in the proportions from each source.
Figure 1 shows the net number of skins imported to France from different countries and the net number of
products from different declared origins exported in 1989 and 1990. The majority of products were said to have
originated in Venezuela, Guyana and Colombia. The relationship between skin imports and product exports of
skins originating in Guyana is surprising. However, as 98 % of the manufactured products were watchstraps,
the discrepancy is possibly not as large as it appears. The same discrepancy is apparent when comparing
1989/1990 skin imports to 1990/1991 manufactured product exports. In this instance 91 % were watchstraps.
Figure 2 shows the net number of skins imported to Italy from 1987 to 1989 and the number of manufactured
products exported from 1988 to 1989. From Figure 2 it can be seen that a large discrepancy is apparent. The
great majority of products were said to have been made from skins of Venezuelan and Colombian origin, but
the majority of skins imported derived from Bolivia, with substantial quantities from Paraguay and Argentina.
As Venezuela, Colombia and Guyana all have management programmes for C. crocodilus, they are widely
known as legal sources of skins. It is possible that they were declared as the source of the skins for re-exported
manufactured products because this causes fewer administrative problems on import. The more contentious
sources, such as Paraguay, Argentina and Bolivia appear to be under-represented. This may well be related
15
to the USA Endangered Species Act, which prohibits imports of Caiman crocodilus yacare, a species which
occurs in the latter three countries. Recorded skin exports in 1990 to Italy show that the great majority of
products were said to have been made from skins of Venezuelan, Guyanan and Colombian origin. The fourth
largest source of skins to Italy was Nicaragua which does not feature at all in the export of products.
Figure 3 shows the combined net number of skins imported to Italy in 1989 and 1990 and the number of
manufactured products exported in 1990 and 1991. Of note, is the import of 40 skins from Paraguay and the
export of 2404 manufactured products (350 belts, 92 handbags, 85 wallets, 1 101 watchstraps, 41 pairs of shoes
and 735 skin/items). Also reported were 112 skins from El Salvador, with product exports of 16,588: 69% of
these were watchstraps but 28% included handbags, shoes and skin/items; the remaining 3% were belts and
wallets. It seems unlikely that these correspond. The difference in the correlation between skins from
Guatemala and product exports may be explained by the fact that most of the products exported were
watchstraps.
Figure 1. Declared origins of skins of Caiman crocodilus imported to France in 1989-1990 and of
manufactured products exported in 1989-90.
French Trade fn Caiman Skfns
2-1,000
23.000
r\ 20, 00DO°l
18, ODD
mCD 16,000*_/
(0H,00D
^ iz,oon
£- ia, ron
B,OO0c
054,DTJG
2,000
J
_i jnI .EL n-i H !
,000 gXV
': ODD 7}o
, 000
AR BO OO XX SV GF GT GY HN PA PY ZA VE
Skin importQ Product export
Figure 2. Declared origins of skins of Caiman crocodilus imported to Italy in 1987-89 and of manufactured
products exported in 1988-89.
Ital Ian Trade In Caiman Skins
60.00Q -
w «,00D
b. 30, 000 -
ju ^JL 1
200,000
180,000
1EQ.Q00 (
<
-HO, 000 I
(
1
120,000
100,000
B0, 000
B0, 000
AR BO CO XX SV GF GT GY hM PY PE VE Nl
| Skin Tmportf7] Product export.
16
Figure 3. Declared origins of skins of Caiman crocodilus imported to Italy in 1989-90 and of manufactured
products exported in 1990-91.
Italian Trade In Caiman Skins
CD flo
W 73
,0G0
.,000
^JL LAR BO CO XX SV GT GY HN N I PA PY VE
| Skin import^] Product export
10(1,(10(1
160,000 J
140,000 §
120,000ft+J
100, 00 D OQ.X
- 80.000 <U
80.000 <J
40.D00 Pfit
- ao.Doo
Table 23. Net export from Italy in 1988 of products manufactured from Caiman
declared countries of origin.
crocodilus skin from different
Country of origin Wallets Watch Straps Shoes Handbags Items Garments
Argentina 750 1297 324 2
Bolivia 6 26165 23 148 599
Colombia 1088 29928 8839 11765 24
French Guiana 693
Guatemala 3 766 35 256
Guyana 1299 18319 6951 12736 89
Honduras 4
Nicaragua 1 7
Indonesia 62
Panama 309 190 291
Paraguay 230 20806 520 239 788 8
Peru 21
El Salvador 568 5384 913 1658
South Africa 2
Sudan 1
Venezuela 2975 13434 59755 5002 33567 330
Zambia 5
Unknown 4580 168 93 1573
Total 6170 65735 117245 22748 63238 453
17
Table 24. Net export from Italy in 1989 of products manufactured from Caiman crocodilus skin from different
declared countries of origin.
Country of origin Wallets Watch Straps Shoes Hand Bags Items Garments Belts
Argentina 3
Bolivia 63 112 2404 4373
Colombia 1005 18856 12409 5547 15746 30 10722
French Guiana 1437 8
Guatemala 286 2 194 84 148 1 50
Guyana 2376 1537 47153 3838 20055 366 11030
Honduras
Indonesia 49
Panama 18 37 8 26
PNG 2 10
Paraguay 400 33 88 270 2 225
El Salvador 234 9756 1368 376 806
USA 1 30
Venezuela 5005 61004 63009 1733 39956 1056 29298
Unknown 317 77 277 12
Total 9369 81399 134330 12886 79329 1455 56550
Table 25. Net export from Italy in 1990 of products manufactured from Caiman crocodilus skin from different
declared countries of origin.
Country of origin Wallets Watch Straps Shoes Handbags Items Garments Belts
Argentina 100 100 64 5
Bolivia 15 60 39 38 1006 1227
Colombia 548 48652 10348 3155 18164 557 8356
French Guiana 54
Guatemala 143 31766 1034 74 272 14
Guyana 1255 5170 27748 2911 15714 13 4793
Honduras 22 13
Indonesia 14
Panama 73 3 15 15
Paraguay 85 1100 41 92 733 343
El Salvador 116 8907 3267 637 450 2
Venezuela 2064 11495 71569 2091 28743 225 15861
Unknown 40 352 21 202
Total 4339 107250 114464 8771 65399 795 30678
18
Table 26. Net export from Italy in 1991 of products manufactured from Caiman crocodilus skin from different
declared countries of origin.
Country of origin Wallets Watch Straps Shoes HandBags Items Garments Belts
Argentina 1050
Bolivia 86 26 9
Colombia 10 9036 2869 815 5418 3 335
French Guiana 188 16
Guatemala 5295 43
Guyana 6 856 1896 301 3097 28 247
Indonesia
Nicaragua 30 91 3
Paraguay 1 2 7
El Salvador 2525 196 4 31 453
Venezuela 17 24172 31240 186 8333 33 451
Unknown 130 31 571
Total 33 42159 37423 1367 17587 64 1505
Table 27. Net export from France in 1989 of products manufactured from Caiman crocodilus skin from
different declared countries of origin.
Country of origin Wallets Watch Straps Shoes Handbags Items Garments Belts
Argentina 1880 54 15
Australia
Bolivia 26641 157 413
Cameroon 20
Colombia 235 279363 77 5711 36 3046
French Guiana 1437
Guatemala 21 229
Guyana 434 227279 83 319 6660 17 5950
Honduras 12499 105 118
Indonesia 247
Panama 75
PNG 2605
Paraguay
El Salvador
South Africa
USA
Venezuela
Viet Nam
Unknown
Total
37
200
906
38887 19 332
1260 37427
1545
569452 92 16 2154
45
10095
1171592
14
1685 442
315
53018
19
188
409
87
2042
12340
19
Table 28. Net export from France in 1990 of products manufactured from Caiman crocodilus skin fromdifferent declared countries of origin.
Country of origin Wallets Watch Straps Shoes Handbags Items Garments Belts
Argentina 9985 22 16
Australia 30
Bolivia 1456 155 2
Cameroon no
Colombia 41889 25 97 6036 439
French Guiana 54
Guatemala 82 254
Guyana 372788 76 12 3278 2134
Honduras 15335 97 98
Indonesia 22
Mali 15
Panama 3
PNG
Paraguay 14 2026 292
El Salvador 24
South Africa
Thailand
Venezuela 173282 62 30 3717 1427
Zimbawe
Unknown 3 3 36 98
Total 614998 166 164 15301 97 4798
Table 29. Net export from France in 1991 of products manufactured from Caiman crocodilus skin from
different declared countries of origin.
Country of origin Wallets Watch Straps Shoes Handbags Items Garments Belts
Bolivia 239 1 14
Cameroon 150
Chad 370
Colombia 29413 30 3 288 3 436
Guatemala 47
Guyana 190759 44 3 532 898
Honduras 1208 15 10
Indonesia 600 3
PNG 3 1
Paraguay 15 75
El Salvador 931 1
Former Soviet Union 84
USA 15
20
Table 29. continued
Country of origin Wallets Watchstraps Shoes Handbags Items Garments Belts
Venezuela 75401 13 247 5253 2 393
Unknown 36 2
Total 299221 87 254 6097 5 1874
Table 30. Declared countries of origin of skins of Caiman crocodilus imported to France, 1983-91.
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Av
Argentina 461 10861 1,415 1415
Bolivia 274 10240 77935 46795 12998 508 18,594 18594
Colombia 2757 45398 5294 34050 8064 10,937 11833
Unknown 1068 67717 20 3021 18 8,981 8981
El Salvador 5203 4540 6184 360 2,036 2036
French Guiana 489 61 61
Guatemala 9980 43008 142 246 694 120 6,759 6772
Guyana 34105 34612 16746 9385 544 11,924 11924
Honduras 41705 53150 211 2940 13455 13,933 13933
Panama 3811 181 22500 132 111 173 3.342 3361
Paraguay 140556 10 49966 5691 24720 27.618 27618
South Africa 183 150 42 42
Venezuela 5086 38379 17208 13986 16822 6096 14002 12.197 13753
Total 8370 365828 275285 140912 42124 102208 9960 24349 19830 120323
Table 31. Declared countries of origin of skins of Caiman crocodilus imported to Italy, 1984-91.
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Av
Argentina 1568 37818 4923
Bolivia 13384 38716 27853 2000 101682 5792
Colombia 15669 2485 835 34641 38274 32739 12924
Unknown 68 61110 58103 16774
EI Salvador 91833 157575 17707 11905 1512 39051
Guatemala 76390 263848 6763 7367 49718
Guyana 34453 67903 5575 1623 13311 16704 1514 196 19815
Nicaragua 7 5 75 9500 5000 1348
Paraguay 59052 1C71 17344 43854 36 16381
Peru 2852 401
Venezuela 322 68697 99303 13375 44712 16674 48915 20519 40853
Total 292738 661404 236342 117947 194346 35478 100193 59966 216317
21
Other species
There has been no reported trade in 1989, 1990 and 1991 in skins of the following species:
Crocodylus intermedins Orinoco Crocodile, Crocodylus palustris Mugger, Crocodylus rhombifer CubanCrocodile, Gavialis gangeticus Gharial, Tomistoma schlegelii False Gharial
One skin of Melanosuchus niger was reported seized on entry to the USA in 1989.
Table 32. Minimum net trade in classic crocodilian skins reported in CITES annual reports.
* Gross exports from the USA
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 Total
A. mississippiensis* 21519 20718 33278 45184 51838 77810 125483 146829 522659
C. acutus 106 573 27 4 1 59 770
C. cataphractus 2030 149 1193 570 554 459 4955
C. intermedius
C. johnsoni 157 824 1274 794 988 884 4921
C. niloticus 6115 9378 18480 22974 27526 41097 39701 48445 213716
C. novaeguineae 29156 43027 33938 37890 34728 42993 47674 32165 301571
C. palustris 3 3 6
C. porosus 5358 6497 5752 7166 10042 15928 13036 14900 78679
C. moreletii 4 1 1 244 18 4 1 273
C. rhombifer
C. siamensis 800 351 605 981 2050 1713 2808 1400 10708
C. gangeticus
T. schlegelii
Total 65,245 80,545 92,081 115,419 128,670 180,968 230,248 245,082 113,8258
DISCUSSION
The world trade in classic crocodilian skins is summarised in Table 32. There has been an overall increase in the
reported trade from 65,245 in 1984 to over 240,000 in 1991. As has been outlined for the individual species, this
increase has been due to the development of controlled management programmes in several countries around the world.
As a result of these changes, C. novaeguineae was overtaken by A. mississippiensis as the main species in trade since
1987. In 1990 trade of A. mississippiensis is almost double that of 1989 probably as a result of skins produced in 1989
not being traded until the following year. US production reached a peak in 1989 of 112,284 and declined in 1990 to
80,276 (Luxmoore, 1992). There is inevitably a further trade in classic crocodilian skins which takes place outside
CITES controls, but there is little evidence for it. The principal areas of concern are Indonesia, where illegal
harvesting of C. porosus and C. novaeguineae continues, and Madagascar, where the export quotas have been exceeded
by almost a factor of five.
The trade in Caiman skins is still far less well regulated and the majority of this is believed not to be under the control
of CrTES. Documented trade was in the region of 800,000 in 1988, falling to some 340,000 in 1991, although the
data are less complete for that year. However, there is evidence of a similar quantity of skins entering Thailand in
1988 without any CITES control. Europe is the major destination for legal Caiman skins, although there is evidence
that some skins illegally enter the Community. There is a substantial tanning and manufacturing industry in Europe,
22
particularly Italy and France, and crocodile skin products are re-exported to destinations all around the world. It is
doubtful if the declared origins of the products are correct in all cases.
In 1992 the CITES Standing Committee proposed a CITES Trade Ban with Italy, recommending that Parties adoptstricter domestic measures in accordance with Article XIV, paragraph 1 of the Convention. The absence of laws,inadequate regulations, poor border controls and the issuance of CITES documents not in accordance with the
Convention have led to Italy becoming a key location for illegal trade (Anon. 1992a). In 1990 Caiman skin prices
quoted from Italian industry sources indicated that legal skins could be bought in Venezuela for US$ 40-50 per sq.ft
compared with US$ 25-32 per sq.ft for illegal skins (Jenkins and Broad in prep.). After 1993 there will be effectively
no internal border restrictions in the EC, therefore if one country is slack in its control of illegal trade the whole ECwill be open to illegal products.
Since 1987, several countries that previously had export quotas for Nile Crocodile skins, have adopted ranching
programmes and increased their output accordingly. A new resolution (Conf. 7. 14) was passed in 1989 redefining the
special criteria under which populations of Appendix I species could be transferred to Appendix II. One of the chief
features of this is the imposition of a time limit on such quota schemes of a maximum of four years before ranching
programmes must be instituted.
The phenomenal growth in the supply of skins for legal trade has had a serious impact on the price of skins and must
place in question the economic viability of farming operations in many countries. It is not likely that this will have
had a comparable impact on the illegal hunting for skins because this activity has far fewer overhead costs associated
with it. However it must threaten the existence of several ranching programmes and this could have potentially serious
consequences for crocodilian conservation.
Another feature of the crocodile farming industry which gives rise to concern is the introduction of exotic species of
crocodiles for the purpose of establishing new farming operations. This began with the import of Nile Crocodiles to
Brazil for a farm in Rio Grande do Sul and continued with the establishment of a captive population of Cuban
Crocodiles in Viet Nam. In view of the danger of these species escaping and building up feral populations, the IUCNCrocodile Specialist Group has adopted a resolution opposing the use of exotic species of crocodilian outside their
natural range in areas where there are wild populations of other species of crocodilian and where they are therefore
more likely to be able to survive in the local environment.
The international trade in crocodile skins has therefore passed from a phase where it was threatening wild populations
in many countries in the 1960s and 1970s, through one of restriction in the early 1980s to rapid growth in the late
1980s. The 1990s look as if they will be characterised by problems associated with over-production. It is to be hoped
that crocodilian conservation will not be overlooked in the ensuing upheaval.
23
References
Anon. 1988. Caiman smuggling uncovered. Traffic Bulletin 10(1/2): 2.
Anon. 1989. Seizures and prosecutions. Traffic Bulletin 11(1): 14.
Anon. 1991. CITES Notification to the Parties No. 636. 1991. Thailand: Ban on CITES Trade, 22 April 1991.
Anon. 1992. Seizures and prosecutions. Traffic Bulletin 13: 2.
Anon. 1992a. CITES Notification to the Parties No. 675. 1992. Italy: Recommendations of the Standing Committee,30 June 1992.
Anon. 1992b.CITES Notification to the Parties No. 673. 1992. Thailand: Lifting of Recommended Ban on Trade in
CITES Specimens, 2 April 1992.
Ashley, J.D. 1989. Introduction. IACTS Report, pp. 4-10.
Dixon, A.M., Milliken, T. and Tokunaga, H. 1988. Japanese imports of crocodile and alligator skins 1970-July 1986.
IACTS Report, pp. 67-168.
Jenkins, M. and Broad, S. (Eds) (in press) International Trade in Reptile Skins: A Review and Analysis of the main
consumer markets.
Luxmoore, R.A. 1992. Directory of Crocodile Farming Operations, Second Edition. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and
Cambridge, UK.
Pani, M. (unpublished report, 1991) Reptile skin trade in Italy. TRAFFIC Europe reptile skin trade report.
WCMC et al., 1993. Significant trade in Wildlife: A review of select Animal Species in CITES Appendix II. Draft
report to the CITES Animals Committee, June 1993.
Acknowledgements
Some of the original data analysis for this report was carried out by Samantha Emmerich. John Caldwell and Duncan
Mackinder assisted with the output of statistics. Lesley McGuffog helped with the checking of legislation.
24
i \l
IUCN UNEP(ft.WWF
WORLD CONSERVATIONMONITORING CENTRE
WCMC provides information services on conservation and sustainable use of
the world's living resources and helps others to develop information systems
of their own. The Centre was founded ir, 1988 by IUCN - The World
Conservation Union. UNEP - United Nations Environment Programme and
WWF - World Wide Fund for Nature.
219 Huntingdon Road
Cambridge, CB3 ODL, UK.
Tel: +44(0)1223 277314
Fax: +44(0)1223 277136
Email: [email protected]
www: wcmc.org.uk