Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 12:42 am
Time: 12:42 am
Results for wildlife crime (china)
6 results foundAuthor: Clarke, Shelley Title: Understanding China's Fish Trade and Traceability Systems Summary: It is widely acknowledged that developments in China, the fastest-growing major economy in the world, have a crucial influence on the future of a wide range of global industries. It should not therefore be surprising that China also plays a pivotal role in the global seafood industry. In fact, China is now the world’s leading exporter of marine fish products, outranking Peru, Norway, the Russian Federation, the USA, Thailand and Chile in 2006. Despite these statistics, details of the fish reprocessing industry (i.e. from imported materials) are not well understood owing to a lack of publicly available data. Better understanding of how fisheries resources are used by China, and the extent to which these processes are controlled by national and international regulations, is an essential component of effective global fisheries management. By illuminating the role China plays in fish reprocessing, the extent to which China must be involved in solutions to the problems of overfishing and illegal, unreported and unregulated catches (IUU) is highlighted. This study has aimed to compile information comprehensively from a wide variety of sources in a fair and consistent manner around two major themes. The first describes the historical development and current structure and operation of China’s fish re-processing trade. This trade is examined by species and product by working backwards to source fisheries and forwards to end-markets. The regulation of the trade using product yield is then described and assessed. The second theme documents current systems for fish traceability in China to understand where there may be weaknesses which allow infiltration of illegally sourced fish. The ability of these systems to comply with existing and pending international fish certification and documentation schemes is also discussed. Under both of these topics, the scope of this study is limited to fish from marine capture fisheries caught or re-processed by mainland China. Aquaculture and domestic consumption within mainland China are not covered. Although Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan have special links with the mainland, these areas maintain their own systems of governance, regulations and trade statistics and thus are also outside the scope of this report. Details: Hong Kong, China: TRAFFIC East Asia, 2009. 111p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 5, 2011 at: www.traffic.org/fisheries-reports/traffic_pub_fisheries9.pdf Year: 2009 Country: China URL: Shelf Number: 121649 Keywords: Illegal FishingWildlife Crime (China) |
Author: Environmental Investigation Agency Title: Made In China: How China's Illegal Ivory Trade is Causing a 21st Century African Elephant Disaster Summary: China has the largest illegal ivory trade of any nation in the world. It is the most significant global destination for illegal ivory. Ivory traders are now thought to be stockpiling elephant tusks and ivory products for lucrative sales to the hundreds of thousands of foreigners expected to attend the Beijing Olympics in the summer of 2008. China’s long failure to crack down on its massive illegal ivory trade makes a mockery of its claims to be hosting a “Green Olympics”. Chinese nationals, companies – some government owned – and organized crime syndicates are implicated in the smuggling of vast amounts of illegal ivory and the consequent elephant poaching afflicting much of Africa. Countries affected include Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Chad, Kenya, Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi, Mozambique, Nigeria, Cameroon, and Mali. Indications suggest that Chinese involvement in illegal ivory trade extends to other African elephant range states as well. With Chinese investment and human presence in resource extraction operations across Africa skyrocketing, demand for ivory will overwhelm the ability of range states to conserve their elephants from poaching gangs connected to Chinese ivory buyers, often in collusion with corrupt government officials. China’s massive illegal ivory trade is not an accident. Failure by the Government of China to ensure meaningful enforcement of CITES regulations that prohibit the import and export of ivory resulted in illegal ivory flooding onto the domestic market in the 1990’s. China’s demand for ivory is directly responsible for the renewed poaching crisis facing many African elephant populations, as this report shows. After CITES increased protection for Africa’s rapidly disappearing elephants by banning international trade in ivory products in 1989, China neglected to fully enshrine those legal protections in domestic law for 17 years. Over that period its government did little to enforce CITES regulations prohibiting ivory imports or exports. Major failures included a vast loophole enabling traders to register ivory which they had “forgotten” to register at the time of the 1989 CITES ban as “pre-convention”, in effect enabling smuggled ivory to be legalized and then moved onto China’s flourishing domestic market. Illegal ivory seized by Chinese government agencies is also alleged to have disappeared into government ivory stocks. Numerous traders have confirmed that government ivory stocks continued to be sold to them in the 1990’s and 2000’s, including via government owned companies. Even the ruling Communist Party of China is reported to have held ivory stocks which were sold to traders. Organized smuggling syndicates have proliferated across Africa in recent years as Chinese companies and nationals pour into the continent, extracting its rich resources to fuel the explosive growth in manufacturing on the Chinese mainland. Whether working for oil companies in Sudan and Angola, or logging companies in west and central Africa, some Chinese nationals are tempted into working for the lucrative underground ivory trade. Africa’s elephants are paying the price for China’s failure to enforce the CITES ban. Recent commendable efforts by China’s government to suppress the illegal ivory trade have resulted in some high-profile seizures as well as restrictions on ivory product sales. Yet the government has now legalized dozens of companies thought to be implicated in illicit trade. Further, it undermines its own efforts to crack down on illegal trade by auctioning off confiscated poached ivory to domestic traders. Worse, China is now seeking legal approval from CITES to take part in future ivory auctions in order to expand its domestic trade. The Chinese government’s determination to host a “Green Olympics” in 2008 will be badly tainted if it continues to protect a domestic ivory trade that is fueling widespread poaching and illegal trade across several continents. The country’s very belated efforts to ratchet up enforcement operations against large-scale smuggling and commercial trade in ivory are not enough to prevent a 21st century African elephant disaster, driven by Chinese consumer demand. Instead the Government of China can affirm its commitment to CITES and to protecting endangered species by taking immediate action to ban the domestic trade in ivory. By simplifying enforcement procedures and empowering enforcement personnel across the nation, ivory trade can be eliminated within China’s borders. A precedent already exists. In 1993 China banned domestic rhino horn trade after rhino poaching in Africa and Asia and the flow of horns to China had reached crisis levels. China’s successful action to save the world’s rhinos demonstrated high level political will to protect the wildlife of other nations. Today, China’s people face two key questions with regard to another beloved endangered species: the African elephant. First, where does all the ivory in China come from, almost 18 years after international trade was banned? And second, does the Government of China have the political will to ban the domestic ivory trade that is helping to push many African elephant populations towards extinction? Details: London; Washington, DC: EIA, 2007. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 31, 2011 at: http://www.eia-global.org/PDF/Report--MadeInChina--Species--May07.pdf Year: 2007 Country: China URL: http://www.eia-global.org/PDF/Report--MadeInChina--Species--May07.pdf Shelf Number: 122567 Keywords: Endangered SpeciesIllegal TradeIvoryOrganized CrimePoachingWildlife Crime (China) |
Author: Nowell, Kristin Title: Taming the Tiger Trade: China's Markets for Wild and Captive Tiger Products Since the 1993 Domestic Trade Ban Summary: Tigers are threatened with extinction, with a global effective population size of fewer than 2,500 adults in the wild. One of the primary threats to their survival is illegal trade in bone, used for traditional medicines or for health tonics. The illegal trade in skins for clothing is a growing threat, as well. With Tigers so rare, demand has widened to other Asian big cat species, including Leopard, Snow Leopard and Clouded Leopard. China’s consumers have held the largest market share of these global, illegal trades. China’s existing policy—a complete trade ban, implemented in 1993—has been vital to protecting Tigers in the wild. China’s government should be congratulated for the positive, long-standing impacts of its policy, its enforcement actions and awareness efforts in support of Tiger conservation. This is particularly the case with traditional medicines. The TRAFFIC surveys of the current report found little Tiger bone available in China, with less than 3% of 663 medicine shops and dealers in 26 Chinese cities claiming to stock it. There was high awareness that Tiger is protected and that trade is illegal (with 64% of retail pharmacies mentioning this to the TRAFFIC investigators). China’s medicinal industry now appears largely in compliance with the 1993 trade ban. The ban has greatly reduced the production, sale and use of Tiger and Leopard medicines. With regard to traditional medicine, China’s policy is achieving its goal. TRAFFIC’s findings provide strong evidence that China’s trade ban has been effective at reducing the market for Tiger products, particularly traditional medicines. Still, illegal trade remains a threat. China’s progress in Tiger conservation, especially Tiger trade, would almost certainly be undone if China’s markets for Tiger products were re-opened. Presently, business people in China who stand to profit from Tiger trade are encouraging demand for Tiger products. And the government of China has been petitioned to ease its trade ban by allowing domestic trade in medicines made from captive-bred Tigers. Details: Hong Kong, China: TRAFFIC East Asia, 2007. 75p. Source: A TRAFFIC East Asia Report: Internet Resource: Accessed August 8, 2012 at http://www.traffic.org/species-reports/traffic_species_mammals16.pdf Year: 2007 Country: China URL: http://www.traffic.org/species-reports/traffic_species_mammals16.pdf Shelf Number: 125942 Keywords: Illegal Wildlife Trade (China)Legislation (China)Offenses Against the Environment (China)Tigers (China)Wildlife Crime (China) |
Author: Environmental Investigation Agency - International Title: Tiger Bone Wine Auctions in China Summary: On 2nd December 2011, news broke that an auction house in Beijing was planning to sell several bottles of tiger bone wine on 3rd December 2011. Following government and media exposure, this sale was cancelled. However in the days afterward EIA discovered that further auctions were scheduled for the 31st December - 8th January 2012. The State Forestry Administration for China once again responded by calling for a halt to that auction. The sale of products containing or claiming to contain tiger bone from auction houses (or indeed any source) in China is illegal under the State Council Order of 1993 (Guofa 1993 No. 39). This applies equally to pre-1993 stocks of tiger bone wine, an issue that was recently clarified by the Chinese State Forestry Administration in a notification sent to auction houses on 9th January 2012. The notification recognised and explicitly stated that auction houses are not permitted to offer products made from tiger bones. In addition to the State Council Order of 1993, the notification also cited infractions of other relevant laws such as "Wildlife Protection Law of 1998", "Implementing Regulations of Terrestrial Wildlife Protection of 1993" and "Criminal Law." However, it has emerged that the December auctions were not isolated incidents. In response to concerns about the sale of tiger bone wine through auction houses, EIA has conducted on-line research into the sector. This research (links are included at the end of the document in original Chinese) has revealed a large number of auctions of tiger bone wine going back as far as 2009. While it is not possible to confirm that all tiger bone wine that was advertised for auction were successfully sold - as only a handful of auction houses publicise the final bid price - they clearly show that there is widespread demand for the product and that recent aborted auctions were not one-off events, but part of a larger trend of tiger bone wine being auctioned. The records also provide important information about the brands of tiger bone wine being offered and the price being asked. Details: London: Environmental Investigation Agency - International, 2012. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 22, 2012 at http://www.eia-international.org/wp-content/uploads/Tiger-Bone-Wine-Auctions-2012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: China URL: http://www.eia-international.org/wp-content/uploads/Tiger-Bone-Wine-Auctions-2012.pdf Shelf Number: 126102 Keywords: Illegal Wildlife Trade (China)Tigers (China)Wildlife Crime (China) |
Author: O'Connell-Rodwell, Caitlin Title: An Assessment of China's Management of Trade in Elephants and Elephant Products Summary: The serious decline of elephants in many Asian and African range countries due to demand for ivory throughout the 1970s and 1980s, particularly in East Asia, resulted in the adoption of various international measures to reduce the threats to elephants. In 1976, the Asian Elephant Elephas maximus was included in Appendix I and the African Elephant Loxodonta africana included in Appendix II of CITES. With continuing declines in populations of the African Elephant, the species was transferred to Appendix I of CITES in 1989, thereby effecting a ban on all commercial international trade in elephants, their parts and derivatives. China took a reservation to the 1989 Appendix I-listing of the African Elephant in order to protect the ivory carving industry, the majority of whose stocks were reported to be pre-Convention stocks (legally obtained prior to China’s accession to CITES). In August of the same year, the CITES Management Authority of China (CNMA) registered a total of 110 importers, exporters and ivory carving workshops, as well as 110 tonnes of raw and worked ivory, most of which was pre-Convention stock. Effective 11 January 1991, China withdrew its reservation and the ban on international commercial trade in ivory took effect in China. Although stocks acquired before the ban were reported to be pre-Convention, analysis of CITES Annual Reports, show that from 1991 to 1999, China exported 571 tusks, 1,006,111 ivory carvings as well as 345 kg of ivory carvings (an additional 9,442,401 ivory carvings were exported in 1990). However, information on the permits and / or the Annual Reports did not record the ‘Source’ of the exports. Of the 566 tusks reported as being exported in 1992, 554 tusks were recorded by China as being from pre-Convention stocks. Japan, however, did not report the import of these tusks - and only 1,769 ivory carvings exported from China from 1991 – 1999 were reported as being pre-Convention stock. The proliferation of safari parks in China since the mid-1990s is reflected in the increasing trend of live elephants imported into China. From 1989 to 2000, China reported the import of a total of 91 live elephants, of which 82 were imported between 1996 and 2000. In addition to the import of live elephants into China, elephants from China are also used for display or performances. Smuggling of live elephants has also been reported, with between five to seven elephants illegally imported from Myanmar in 1995. Not all reported imports appear to have been conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. The conservation purposes and benefits of the import, in 1996, of 16 captive bred elephants from Myanmar for ‘Breeding’ are questionable. Perhaps of greater concern is the import, in 2000, of a single shipment of 20 wild elephants from Malaysia for ‘Zoos’. This trade is difficult to justify when there are captive bred specimens which could also have been used for the stated purpose. Furthermore, at least one safari park in China, the Guangzhou Panyu Safari Park, has an animal exchange programme under which it recently exported four red pandas, Ailurus fulgens, to Malacca zoo in Malaysia. It would appear that commercial trade in CITES Appendix I-listed species is being conducted where the profit is ‘in kind’. Seizure information for any illegal products, by its very nature, can only provide an indication of levels of illegal trade. Assessing China’s full role in the illicit ivory trade is exacerbated due to serious deficiencies in China’s seizure reporting system. Data that is available often lacks details on the date, number of pieces and/or weight of the seizure. The actual scale of illicit ivory trade in China therefore is likely to be considerably larger than current data shows. Nonetheless, available data clearly shows that China is a significant consumer of illegal ivory. Based on available data for the period January 1998 to September 2001, a minimum of 30 - 45 tonnes of ivory were seized destined for or entering China. Rhinoceros horn was also intercepted in some shipments from Africa. In addition to illicit ivory in trade, elephant skin reported to be equivalent to 20 elephants, believed to have originated in Myanmar and destined for a medicine manufacturing company in Shanghai was seized in 2000. In 2001, a further 10 tonnes of elephant skin, from an original 15 tonnes purchased in 1993, were seized in a Guangzhou traditional Chinese medicine company. The 15 tonnes were believed to represent 260 elephants. Smaller quantities of elephant skin also were observed by TRAFFIC staff for sale in the border areas of Laos and Myanmar. The state-run ivory carving industry has declined since the international trade ban in 1989 and it is likely that much of the ivory-carving industry now is run through private, and illegal, family operations. The main buyers of ivory are believed to be Chinese nationals, and the prosperous cities such as Shanghai, Guangzhou and Beijing believed to be the main centres of ivory consumption. One vendor in a Beijing outlet visited in 2000 remarked that he could obtain as much new ivory as was required. In general, Chinese nationals mainly purchase ivory at the lower end of the price range, particularly smaller pieces such as jewellery, name chops and chopsticks. China’s emergence as an ivory consumer market, and its potential to develop even further, can be explained, in part, through the growth of China’s private retail sector, the strong and increasing purchasing power of Chinese consumers and weak enforcement of ivory trade regulations within China. Consumer expenditure has surged in recent years and retail sales for jewellery, the most relevant category for ivory for which retail sales statistics in China are available, increased from over USD 360 million (RMB 3 billion) in 1994 to over USD 1.85 billion (RMB 15.3 billion) in 2000. Strong trade links with Africa also shed light on the dynamics of the illegal ivory trade. Seizures of illegally imported ivory from expatriate Chinese returning from Africa and sent by post are common. The China-Africa link supports earlier evidence, documented by TRAFFIC, of Africa-based,Asian-run ivory processing operations which produce semi-worked and worked ivory products for illicit export to selected Asian markets including to China. The majority of ivory in China’s markets is believed to be from African elephants. Illegal ivory imports from Myanmar have been documented, but ivory vendors and carvers expressed a preference for African ivory. Corruption, although a common phenomenon throughout the world, can not be treated lightly: diplomats representing the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea have been involved in a number of documented cases of ivory smuggling on a large scale. There is little evidence to suggest that North Korea has a domestic ivory carving industry within its own borders, and all seizure cases involving North Korean diplomats returning ‘home’ with consignments of raw ivory had air tickets which involved a stopover in Beijing, a routing which would make it convenient to move large volumes of ivory into China as diplomatic cargo (T. Milliken, pers. comm., June 2002). Recently an official from airport Customs and a shipping worker from China Air were implicated in a smuggling case of around 14 tonnes of ivory. The involvement of an unnamed ‘organ in China of a foreign country’ in this recent case also was alleged although further details are not available. The Wild Animal Protection Law (1989), the Enforcement Regulations for the Protection of Terrestrial Wildlife of the People’s Republic of China (1992) and the Customs Law (1987) are the principal legal instruments regulating import and export, processing and sale of Asian and African Elephant products. The State Forestry Administration also recently issued Notification 2001/234 urging relevant agencies to pay close attention to illicit ivory trade and established price standards for ivory so that illegal trade could be treated as criminal cases. Some successful enforcement actions have been carried out as reflected in the seizures made by Customs. Successful joint investigations and operations involving a range of relevant agencies also have been carried out on a number occasions. While these efforts are to be commended, so far they have been one-off exercises only and their impact would be greatly increased if carried out on a regular basis. Overall, however, enforcement of legal instruments is weak. Since registration in 1989, no further monitoring of ivory stocks in China has been conducted. Traders are not required to have a specific permit to sell ivory despite the Class I protected status of the African and Asian Elephant and despite the understanding that only vendors that registered in 1989 would be considered legal operators. It is therefore no possible to determine whether ivory seen in the markets of China is derived from stocks registered in 1989 or whether it has been more recently, and thus illegally, acquired. Implementation of legislation is hindered by a lack of inter-agency communication, overlapping responsibilities of government agencies and the consequent lack of clarity as to which agency is responsible for implementing which aspects of the law. This situation is particularly apparent with regard to the disposal of products confiscated from illegal trade. It is not clear which agency is responsible for holding confiscated stocks and whether confiscated ivory is kept in storage, destroyed or released / sold on to the domestic market. Details: TRAFFIC East Asia, 2002. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: TRAFFIC Online Report Series No.3: Accessed March 21, 2013 at: http://www.traffic.org/mammals/ Year: 2002 Country: China URL: http://www.traffic.org/mammals/ Shelf Number: 128059 Keywords: Animal PoachingElephantsIllegal Wildlife TradeIvoryWildlife ConservationWildlife Crime (China)Wildlife Management |
Author: WildAid Title: Ivory Demand in China Summary: Elephants are primarily poached for their ivory, which comes from the tusks of all African and male Asian elephants, and is used for carvings, jewelry, chopsticks, and other crafts. While the use of ivory dates back hundreds of years, scientists believe ivory has been processed on an industrial scale in the last century to supply markets in the U.S., Europe, and recently Asia. In 2007, African elephant populations were approximately 500,000-700,000, while the estimated global Asian elephant population was 30,000-50,000. In 1976, the African elephant was listed under Appendix II of the UN Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), designed to control and limit trade, while in 1975 the Asian elephant was listed on CITES Appendix I, prohibiting international trade. However, the CITES regulatory system was subject to widespread abuse and African elephant populations fell from more than 1.2 million to roughly 600,000 by 1989. During the 1980s, a decade referred to as the "Ivory Wars", at least 700,000 elephants were slaughtered throughout Africa as legal trade enabled large-scale laundering of ivory from poached elephants. Details: San Francisco: WildAid, 2014. 7p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 14, 2014 at: http://www.wildaid.org/sites/default/files/resources/WEBReportIvoryDemandinChina2014.pdf Year: 2017 Country: China URL: http://www.wildaid.org/sites/default/files/resources/WEBReportIvoryDemandinChina2014.pdf Shelf Number: 133071 Keywords: Animal PoachingElephantsEndangered SpeciesIllegal Wildlife TradeIvory Wildlife ConservationWildlife Crime (China) |