INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE AND NATURAL

RESOURCES

Ins

Sk

The ae
Pr ae ae”

ile.

e @

2:6. Dias:
re

Re
se aay a Bere Sr
fas a A ae

parry a ae

Rept

In

%

i, CRS
ee

‘Trade

CONSERVATION MONITORING CENTRE

Indian

quae

With the financial assistance of the United Nations Environment Programme, the

World Wildlife Fund and the US Fish & Wildlife Service.

At the end of 1979 the Conservation Monitoring Centre was set up at Cambridge
UK by the *International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural
Resources (IUCN) to collect, collate and supply essential data on which to base
the management of living natural resources. The Centre comprises several units.
The compilation of the Red Data Books -- status catalogues of threatened species
of Mammals, Amphibians and Reptiles, Fish, Invertebrates and Birds. (the latter
being done by an office of the International Council for Bird Preservation) -- is
carried out by the Species Conservation Monitoring Unit; the Red Data Book on
Plants being compiled at a module of this unit at the Royal Botanic Gardens,
Kew. The Wildlife Trade Monitoring Unit collects and analyses data on the status
of wild species figuring in trade, the information being used in the management of
such species and in the regulation of trading practices. A unit for monitoring the
status of national parks and other specially protected areas has just been
established. Data are handled by data-processor and are thus available for
presentation as appropriate for any particular purpose, such as the requirements
of international conservation conventions (e.g. Convention on International Trade
in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora; Convention on the Conservation of
Migratory Species of Wild Animals) or for determining priorities in planning
conservation action by governments and NGOs.

The Conservation Monitoring Centre receives most of its financial support from
the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Wildlife Fund
(WWF), and both these organizations use the Centre's output in developing their
own programmes.

This paper summarizes a report prepared by Tim Inskipp for TRAFFIC
International (now the Wildlife Trade Monitoring Unit). The original data are
deposited in the archives of the Conservation Monitoring Centre.

*International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, 1196
Gland, Switzerland. :

The front cover shows part of a Water monitor skin Varanus salvator and the back
cover shows a Rat snake and two Asiatic cobras.

eos
Conservation Monitoring Centre,
219c Huntingdon Road, Cambridge CB3 ODL, United Kingdom.

Printed by Cambridge Free Press, 56 Fitzroy Street, Cambridge.

|

Abstract

Despite an export ban it was known that reptile skins and
products were still leaving India. This study investigated
the internal trade, the methods of illegal export, and the
effects on reptile populations. An analysis of the trade
statistics of India and the consumer countries illustrates
the pattern of trade and demonstrates a continuation of
illegal exports. Recommendations are given for improving
the present situation.

Introduction

The export of reptile skins and products from India has
been an important trade for many years. It has been
estimated that in 1932 about 2,500,000 skins were exported
and it is likely that approximately this level of trade was
maintained annually until conservation restrictions
introduced recently first severely limited and then totally
banned the legal export trade. The comprehensive ban was
instituted in 1979 but the export of all the commercially
valuable species was prohibited by 1976.

Despite these controls it has been apparent from
import statistics of consumer countries that large numbers
of skins have been leaving the country.

This project was conceived to investigate the apparent
illegal trade and find out:

a. species involved, their relative importance, and
methods of catching;

b. internal trade in skins and products;

G: extent of legal export trade in the past;

d. methods of illegal export from the country;

e. evidence of effects on wild populations and the
role of reptiles in the environment.

The investigation was carried out during February to
April 1980. The areas visited were the four main exporting
centres: Bombay, Madras, Calcutta and Delhi with a brief
visit to Mysore in the main catching area of south India.

Species Involved

[Note that the scientific and common names follow those
used in Groombridge (1981) with a few minor
modifications, and Whitaker (1978) for other species of
snakes. |

Of the four groups of reptiles in India the snakes have
constituted the most valuable part of the trade in recent
years. Probably the most important species is the Rat
snake Ptyas mucosus, a common and widespread species
that grows to about 2 m in length. Of almost equal
importance is the Asiatic cobra Naja naja (1.5 m). Other
species used are the Checkered keelback watersnake
Xenochrophis piscator (0.75 m), Russell's viper Vipera
russelli (1 m), Indian sand boa Eryx conicus (0.5 m) which is
called 'baby python! in the skin trade, and Olive keelback
watersnake Atretium schistosum (0.5 m). The very large
Indian python Python molurus (6 m) was an important
species in the past. Other species that have been used are
the Common trinket snake Elaphe helena (1.5 m), Russell's
kukri snake Oligodon taeniolatus (0.5 m), Banded racer
Argyrogena fasciolatus a m), Common cat snake Boiga
trigonata (1m), Painted bronzeback tree snake
Dendrelaphis pictus (1.5 m) and Red sand boa Eryx johni (1
m) (Daniel 1970). In 1979, trade in hundreds of skins of the
Indian egg-eating snake Elachistodon westermanni (0.8 m)
was reported (see p. 6) but it seems likely that this was due
to misidentification or false declarations. This species is
only known from a _ handful of museum _ specimens
(Rosenberg and Gans, 1976). There are about 20 other

species which are large enough to apparently be
commercially viable (Anon 1933) but do not seem to have
been used in the trade. These include 11 sea snakes
(Hydrophiidae), some of which are used in the skin trade in
E.Asia and the Philippines, also the Dog-faced water snake
Cerberus rhynchops which is extensively used in S.E.Asia.

The most important lizards are the monitors Varanus,
four species of which are involved. The Water monitor V.
salvator (2.5 m) is the most valuable because of its
attractively patterned skin, followed by the Indian monitor
V. bengalensis (1 m), the Yellow monitor V. flavescens (1
m) and the Desert monitor V. griseus (1 m). The only other
lizards of commercial value are the Indian spiny-tailed
lizard Uromastyx hardwickii (0.45 m) and potentially some
Himalayan agamids (Daniel 1970).

In the past the three species of crocodilians, the
Mugger Crocodylus palustris, the Estuarine crocodile C.
porosus and the Gharial Gavialis gangeticus were very
important in the skin trade but their numbers were gravely
depleted and legal export of their skins ceased some time
ago.

The extent of trade in leather from sea turtles, five
species of which occur in India - Cheloniidae and
Dermochelyidae - is not known but ‘considerable numbers!
of Olive ridley turtles Lepidochelys olivacea were captured
by fishermen on the Visakhapatnam coast during the period
November 1978 to March 1979 (Dutt 1979), and hundreds of
skinned turtles were reportedly washed ashore on the east
coast of India during a recent nesting season of the Olive
ridley (F.W.King pers. comm. 1980). Apparently this trade
is only of recent origin (J.Frazier pers. comm. 1980). The
destination of the turtle skins in trade is not known; a
recent analysis of the trade statistics did not reveal any
evidence of trade out of India (Mack, Duplaix and Wells
1979). The flippers of the Green turtle Chelonia mydas and
the Olive ridley are used by fishermen in Kutch to make
crude shoes for walking on coral reefs (R.Whitaker pers.
comm. 1981).

Methods of Catching and
Treatment of Skins

Most snakes are caught in south India where there has been
a long tradition amongst certain tribal groups, Of these
the Irulas of Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh are the most
important. They have an intimate knowledge of the
species involved and are adept at tracking them down and
digging them out of their dens. A good trapper could
apparently collect two to five big snakes in a day in a good
area that had not been heavily hunted (Whitaker 1978).
The Irulas have never been primarily snake catchers,
however. They also hunt rats and collect honey, termites
and roots.

The number of snakes that used to be caught for the
skin trade is unknown but at one stage about 9000 skins
used to be handled daily by one tannery in south India; by
1970 this was reduced to 3000 a day (Daniel 1970).

The monitor lizards have been obtained from all parts
of India and the most important species is the widely
distributed Indian monitor. The Water monitor occurs in
coastal northeast India, and also the Andaman and Nicobar
Islands. The Desert monitor is confined to the arid
northwest. Monitors are usually obtained by digging them
out of their burrows or chasing them with dogs.

The skins obtained are sometimes exported in a raw
state with only superficial cleaning and perhaps an alum or
bark-tanning procedure, but many skins, especially those of
snakes, are very perishable in this state and are therefore
chemically tanned before export. A number of tanneries,
especially in the Madras, Calcutta and Kanpur areas, used
to specialise in tanning reptile skins and, although no
reptiles are now killed legally, they presumably continue to

tan illegally taken reptile skins along with their legitimate
business in other leathers.

TABLE 1 Exports of raw reptile skins from India, 1965-80

Quantity Value (Rs) Value per unit
of quantity

1965-66 319,182 kg. By deL p/S) 16.0 Rs per kg
1966-67 285,181 TPZUG 256 Baa 2)
1967-68 211,184 4,701,654 2253

1968-69 1,095), 32. 5 O29 5 4.6

1969-70 1, 735),331 7,234,374 4.2
1970-71 357,687 1,317,309 250
A 7—2 708 , 799 2,084, 306 2.9
1972-73 674,180 2,572,654 3.8
1973-74 442,696 2,615,622 5.9
1974-75" 171,175 1,149,981 6.7
1975-76 86 ,089 451,974 5.3
1976-77 7,066 50,000 Toil
1977-78 590 kg. 421,618 714.6 Rs per kg
1978-79 Oo O =
1979-80 fo) O =

* Years are from April to March.

Source: Monthly Statistics of Foreign Trade of India

Internal Trade in Skins and Products

The legal export of reptile skins and products virtually
ceased in 1976 and no licences for the killing of reptiles
have been issued since that time. However it is still
legally possible to trade internally in stocks of old skins
and products made from them. Under the terms of the
Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (which is in effect in all
states except Nagaland and Jammu and Kashmir) and its
subsequent amendments, all species of reptiles are now
protected. In the original Act only the crocodilians, Indian
python, Desert monitor and Water monitor were protected
and the killing of snakes was largely indiscriminate and
uncontrolled. An amendment in October 1977 brought all
snakes under control and no licences for the killing of
reptiles for trade purposes have apparently been issued by
State Chief Wild Life Wardens since that date.

However, it is widely believed that the killing of
reptiles especially snakes and mionitor lizards stili
continues on a large scale (Anon 1978b, Biddapa 1980, Gill
1981) and a brief investigation as part of this study
uncovered evidence of continued killing. Vendors in a
market at Mysore, Karnataka were ostensibly selling food
and curios to tourists but as a sideline they handled fresh
untanned skins of snakes such as Asiatic cobra and Indian
sand boa. This practice has also been noted at
Mahabalipuram, Tamil Nadu (F.W.Kirg pers. comm. 1980).
In Calcutta several dealers had stocks of skins of various
species including many Indian python and Water monitor.
It was claimed that many of the skins were freshly
obtained and judging by their appearance and odour it was
thought that this was the case.

Skins that are sold directly to ‘ourists command a
much higher price than those destined for the commercial
trade. Tanned Rat snake skins in Calcutta were offered at
Rs.20-40; Yellow monitor, Rs.20; Water monitor, Rs.50-80;
and a 10 ft Indian python skin, Rs.320. !n Bombay the skin
prices were lower, e.g. about Rs.14 for a Rat snake. The
snake catchers would be paid about Rs.6-8 for a 4.5 in.
wide Rat snake skin, Rs.9-10 for a 5 in. skin, Rs.15-16 for a
5.5-6 in. skin, and Rs.16-18 for a 6.5 in. skin. The trader
probably realises at least three times these prices when he
sells to a bag manufacturer and even more if he sells to an
international smuggler. (Rate of exchange at the time of
the survey : approx. Rs.18 = £1 Sterling). The price per
skin of whipsnakes (a trade name for the Rat snake) in
March/April 1980 was US$3 in Singapore, $2-4 in France,
and $3-5 in the U.K.

Many of the skins are made up into leather goods for
the tourist trade - bags, waliets, belts, shoes and even
jackets are commonly sold in the tourist centres of the
main cities and towns. In theory the sale or transfer of any
reptile product without a licence is forbidden under the
terms of the Wildlife (Protection) Act. Although no
reptiles are now being killed legally it was apparent at the
time of the 1977 amendment to the Act that some dealers
had large stocks of reptile skins. These stocks were
declared to the State Chief Wild Life Wardens and the
dealers were allowed to continue trade within the country
but only with these legally acquired skins.

In Bombay there are very few licensed dealers in
reptile products and only one has declared a stock of skins
- 20,000 fully tanned and coloured Rat snake skins
(P.Kannan pers. comm. 1981). However, there is a large
number of traders ranging from travelling salesmen
circulating amongst the tourists with a few bags and
wallets to small shops in the high class hotels and larger
shops in the more exclusive shopping centres. The products
noted were mainly of Rat snake and Asiatic cobra with a
very small quantity of Indian monitor and rather
old-looking Indian python. The prices for Asiatic cobra
products in the hotel shops ranged from Rs.45 for a belt,
Rs.60 for-a wallet to Rs.225 for a 5 skin bag and

Rs.300 for a briefcase. Rat snake was more expensive witn
bags up to Rs.300. Monitor purses were Rs.110., shoes
Rs.180 per pair and bags Rs.225. At the roadside stalls
Asiatic cobra bags could be obtained for Rs.90 or less
(depending on the extent of haggling) and out-of-fashion
Indian python bags were Rs.140.

Enforcement of the Wild Life (Protection)-Act is the
responsibility of the State Chief Wild Life Wardens. They
can be aided in this task by the Government Regional
Directors for Wild Life Preservation in each of the four
major cities of India. In Bombay an active campaign of
raids on unlicensed traders has been carried out under the
supervision of the local Director (Grove 198!)
Unfortunately the legal situation is very complex and
perhaps inadequate and the larger dealers are able to
survive confiscation of their stocks and unrealistic fines
and carry on business after prosecution. However, the
advantage of this level of enforcement is that the trade
appears to be confined almost entirely to the commone:
snakes - .o crocodilian or fresh python products were nove
during “his study and very few monitor products were
involves.

Madras used to be the centre of the snakeskin trade
when it was legal and it is therefore not surprising that
there are large stocks of skins still held there. A report by
the Regional Director for Wild Life Preservation
(Viswanathan 1979) listed 27 licensed dealers in Tami:
Nadu (all except five in Madras) holding total stocks ir
September 1979 of 2,774,829 snake skins ana 295,561 lizard
skins. Two major dealers had over one million skins each.
A more recent stock-take has apparently revealed the
presence of a much larger number of skins - possibly as
many as ten millior snakes. In September 1980 the local
Wildlife Warden seized about 17,000 snake skins valued at
ever Rs.50,000 irom a tannery near Madras that was
allegedly processing them without a licence (Anon 1980a).
Reptile skins and products were available in many places
and again involved mainly the Rat snake and Asiatic
cobra. Prices were somewhat lower than in Bombay which
was a reflection hotn of the local origin of the goods and
the less international nature of the city. Apparently some
crocodile skins are smuggled in from Sri Lanka for local
processing.

In Calcutta there were 34 licensed dealers holding
total stocks in December 1979 of 2,824,382 snake skins and
3,142,909 lizard skins (A.Bose, Regionai Director, pers.
comm. 1980). The snakes were separated into two
categories: poisonous and non-poisonous but there were
only 100 poisonous snakes (presumably Asiatic cobra). The
lizards were split into four categories, all monitors
Varanus: '‘oval-grained lizard' = V... flavescens 1,599,766;
"Agra lizard' which probably refers to V. Sengalensis
1,532,500; ‘Bengal lizard' = V. bengalensis 8025: and 'water
lizard' = V. salvator 2618. Many of the dealers have retail

' outlets in the Hogg Market, a huge complex of stalls anc

shops where almost any item can be obtained. Here, ir
contrast to the other cities, there was a great variety o:
reptile skins and products available. The prices of the
skins are included above and the foitowing products were
offered: Rat snake and Asiatic cobra bags Rs.95 (small),
Rs.200 (large); Indian sand boa, wallets Rs.40, large bags
Rs.200; Russell's viper bags Rs.150; Water monitor bags
Rs.200; crocodile: fresh 'baby croc' (probably Mugger) bags
Rs.1250, out-of-fashion bags Rs.600-800.

The ready availability of crocodile skin bags ana
python skins is particularly worrying as these species have
been protected for some time in India. This indicates a low
level of enforcement of the Act in this area. An enquiry
put to the Chief Wild Life Warden established the fact tha
there were ten court cases for infringements in 1979 anc
these involved only one reptile - a python skin. The dealers
intimated that python skins were readily obtainable in
large numbers and that small numbers of crocodile skins
could be produced on request.

»

TABLE 2a Exports of raw reptile skins from India, 1971-74

ee eS RE =

PE OF SKIN Country | 197] 1972 :
ND of No. Value No. Yalue-
(TARIFF HEADING) | Destination | (Rs) (Rs)
Australia _ 14000 60439 tea / ; |
[France 4000080833 36 wi
WATER Hi
jong Kong RoE a eS eT
etc taly EPS ESI EE eI Pe TET
1 fSOGS) Japan 90890 314863
r Peswitzeciand 5 aus WanesOn tse 65185 Iie staat) Br Pray ENG rsnec nm err ee eT
United Kinadon 5350 ____ [27/OR nae naan eter ei NARS Ee
TOTAL 153340 484000 131098 489709
oPrance. _ | Mbt anth To a
OTHER Fed, Rep. of German E [ RorSpiv ;
MONITORS [ety 000 #101 I 10900 wena g5giaN nan yeas denned

(2119004) [PaSpaing VAR waiAuiallt Faaine ele | eae RI ia ae eee a [Basl(0000. mS
United KInadom i ar rae Rea re ee

7940 26197 9799 45011"

28799 105377,

France 15900 24096 139200 372823 28526 142571 31650 236719
Fed, Rep. of German 4000 Ti126'-. || ASRS Sk RAL RO SERRE [APPS OOO! 25766
Pas: Te MMe MNO [> 5000 25540, [c= Rea Rey 2 Tee eworiN
oes Sgt CR PG Nao) SW | sovikengOMssaliLe: oF viaReMiNnela| ;
[DaUapan ea eNm SMLGN|2:78026 847006 2977301411477 155830 986858 102673 766391. |
Singapore 5000 ELVA aes Sones Ee ene) Pes ee ee
i ae Spain gia aolai ak | NOONE VORA 7a [gc Wh Geena 75000 170835_]
Switzerland ae ee a RS SE 7icie(O 54 RE ae Spahr sted |
United Kinadom 96108 223372 1591 | 61343 26000 [02820 50000 171552. |
TOTAL 399334 1121108 | 530722 2159305 210256 1232249 | 212323 1371263
Canada 2400 MA aan
France 3 3820 1900 7521
SNAKES FedsuRep. oficermany [Mls wr | 750 1842 {0000 160791
ea ae [tal 6100 21075 72165 130376 6500 8200
fi +hon) Spain (Eee 905 Sane
Boner Sweden 1000 S500 ||. Sites ai, (Meine nage Se eee
Switzerland 5000 7S a SE OR nk a oe are ew]
ne) United Kingdom a Se Sa NE DATE Se ace oe aa es 7
TOTAL 12100. 51063 88085 170794 8400 15721 10000 160791 |
OTHER Fed, Rep. of German 500 1133 400 688 alot i
REPTILES Ital 2000 532) | eato iene) a acwot bis Beal nied
(1970-76 United Kingdom 31700 2553 | Sa asbav Wankel ai Snfesii a tuliin tule sip
2119006 TOTAL 34200 31607 . 400 688 [rege serge Fea
Pe pcebiet MUREa5.. | o1mw. spots nat
Austria 300 [bce | ee eS
[Gatada Mis Ve Sate S| WOO Z400M| SOD a TT MINUTOS Ce]
55900 104929 173600 467363 58426 267345 31650 36719
Fed, Rep. of German 4500 8859 8750 399Pilelei ee eee ee 3000 186557
1000 Ol See Oh rn aT Se
TOTALS ilinanWale. a J ee | 5000 EE Te i a ee en ates Aue
22900 73778 137940 384578 6500 8200" Te Van
393916 1243982 431668 1996834 203730 1304824 113624 807029
Spat iT a ae TT 6e5C 66420 5000 199838
| Sweden 1000 3500. | sewed naw Slate) weet, ded oo |, ae
Switzerland 0 29673 3866 (7B6O usec eee ee al

United Kingdom 132808 263830 28931_ 95414 33940 129017 59799 216563

|_ United Kingdom |
les GRAND TOTAL 636974 1811809 | 808305 3097018 | 302596 1716907 | 253073 1646706

TABLE 2b Exports of raw reptile skins from India, 1975-79~*

TYPE OF SKIN
AND
(TARIFF HEADING)

Country
of
Destination

United Kingdom

Japan

TOTAL

Fed, Rep. of German 210 1630
Ital 10000 53955

Japan 192846
United Kingdom 81914

345020

WATER
MONITOR

(2119003)

152109
21000 152109

OTHER
MONITORS

(2119004)

208637
35352 208637

OTHER
LIZARDS

(2119005)

21231
163919

SNAKES (other |,
than python) Fed. Rep. of Germany
(1976-2119006

1977-2119905) | TOTAL

580
580

412893
412893

OTHER
REPTILES
(1977-2119905)

Ped, Rep. of German
Hong Kong

Ital
TOTALS apa EN | 248 1 401433 ek eee rs
United Kingdom 37000 234023 Ss 2123 oe

GRAND TOTAL (22691 705766 37066 213919 590 421618

* There were no recorded exports of raw reptile skins in 1978 and 1979.

Source: Monthly Statistics of Foreign Trade of India.

In Delhi there were 30 licensed dealers holding total

stocks of 89,267 skins in December 1977, 151,540 in
December 1978 and 158,694 in December 1979 (Prasad
pers. comm. 1980). There was no species breakdown

available but it-was thought that most of the skins would
be from Asiatic cobras. It was assumed that the annual
increase in numbers was due to freshly killed snakes even
though no licences for killing had been issued. Prices were
slightly higher than Bombay and a wider variety of
products was available. Rat snake and Asiatic cobra
wallets were Rs.65-90 and Indian python wallets were
Rs.105. A jacket made from at least 15 skins of Russell's
viper was Rs.450 and Asiatic cobra skin jackets were
slightly cheaper. An Asiatic cobra skin attache case was
Rs.540. There were probably no seizures involving reptile
products in Delhi in 1979 but previous seizures and
prosecutions involved illegally taken monitor skins.

Export Trade

As indicated previously the export of reptile skins has long
been an important trade. Since the early 1950s there have
been several major fluctuations in the quantities exported
(Tables 1 and 3), presumably as a result of differences in
availability of skins and the introduction of various
conservation restrictions. Crocodilians were the first
reptiles to be covered by controls - export ef them or any
of their products was apparently banned in 1958. In 1948
16,000 and in 1949 30,000 raw skins, mainly of marsh
crocodile, were exported through Calcutta and the
estimated production of crocodile skins at that time was
40,000 to 50,000 per annum. The only export subsequent to
1958 seems to have been in 1964 when 223 kg of crocodile
skins were exported to the U.K. and France (Daniel 1970,
Whitaker & Daniel 1978). The Exports (Control) Order,
1968 (made under the Imports and Exports (Control) Act,
1947) introduced a quota system for the export of the
Indian python and Water monitor. By 1973 the commercial
export of Indian python and all poisonous snakes was
banned and all other reptiles were subject to quotas. In
1974 the Desert monitor and Reticulated python Python
reticulatus (which only occurs in Indian territory on the
Nicobar Islands) were added to the banned list and in
December: 1975 the other three species of monitor, the
Indian spiny-tailed lizard and all snakes and sea turtles
were also banned. In 1979 all commercial reptile exports
from India were finally prohibited. India ratified the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) on 3 July 1976. Appendix
I at that time listed the following Indian species involved in
the skin trade: Mugger; Gharial; Yellow, Indian and Desert
monitors; Indian python. Appendix II listed the five sea
turtles, Estuarine crocodile, Water monitor, Reticulated
python and Indian egg-eating snake. On 4 February 1977
all the sea turtles were elevated to Appendix I and the
Indian spiny-tailed lizard and the sand boas were added to
Appendix II. On 28 June 1979 the Estuarine crocodile was
elevated to Appendix I. Japan has, under the terms of the
Convention, reserved the right to continue trading in three
of the sea turtle species, the Estuarine crocodile and the
three Appendix I monitors. Several other countries have
also placed reservations on sea turtles and the Estuarine
crocodile.

The great volume of valuable skins exported in the
early 1950s presumably comprised large numbers of
crocodilian skins and the demise of this trade led to a
slump at the end of that decade. However, over the next
ten years there was a rapid increase in the skin trade
followed by another slump the reasons for which are not
entirely clear, The statistics show this slump is mainly
accounted for by a very considerable decrease in tanned
snake skins exported to the Federal Republic of Germany
and the U.S.A. in 1968-70. It may indicate stock-piling of
Indian python skins prior to the introduction of the quota
system for that species. Due to various restrictions in the
mid 1970s the trade continued at a fairly low level with a

final surge in 1976 when the export ban imposed at the end
of 1975 was lifted for snake skins to enable registered
exporters to liquidate their stocks.

Despite the restriction on export of all reptiles from
about the end of 1975 both.the Indian export statistics
(Tables 1-4) and the import statistics of consumer
countries (Table 5) indicate that considerable quantities of
skins have been exported - at least some of these
presumably illegally. Official trade statistics for consumer
countries were only readily available in a few cases and it
is apparent that the number of animals involved is much
greater than indicated. That the trade is still continuing is
demonstrated by an analysis of imports into the U.S.A.
during January to March 1981 (TRAFFIC (U.S.A.) 1981).
Thousands of raw snake skins were imported from Europe
and Afghanistan, and thousands of snake skin products from
Europe, Canada and Hong Kong, all with India given as the
country of origin.

The U.K. records the import from India of 263,412
skins of Yellow monitor in 1976 (Department of. the
Environment 1976). This species was listed on Appendix I
of CITES at the time and its export was banned by India.
However the U.K. in its preliminary implementation of
CITES (ratification did not take place until 2 August 1976)
specifically excluded this species (and the Indian monitor
and Desert monitor) in its terms of implementation. India
records the export to the U.K. in 1976 of 125,000 Water
monitor skins and 74,173 ‘other lizard' skins, as well as
20,000 ‘other monitor! skins (Tables 2b & 4b). The U.K.
re-exported many monitor skins originating from India - a
total of over 250,000 Yellow monitors and nearly 60,000
Desert monitors from 1976 to 1978 (Department of the
Environment 1976, 1977, 1978) many of which went to
CITES Party states and thus contravened at least the spirit
of the Convention.

The 1978 CITES report of the Federal Republic of
Germany lists the import from India of 32 pieces of
leatherware made from a species of Boidae and three skins
of Python mucosus (sic), but no imports of Water monitor
skins (cf. Table 4b). The report also lists the re-export of

27 skins and 54 handbags made irom a species of Varanus |

originating in India (F.R.G. Yearly Statistics 1978). The
1979 report (F.R.G. Yearly Statistics 1979) lists the import
of 513 skins of the Indian egg-eating snake from Belgium
and also the re-export of seven articles of clothing made
from this species and originating from India (see p. 1).

The CITES reports of Switzerland (Swiss Federal
Veterinary Office) detail trade in reptile skins of Indian
species but without citing India as the country of origin. In
1976 imports of 72,365 skins of the three Appendix I
monitors and !041 skins of Indian python were recorded. In
1977 there were 4322 inonitor skins imported and 2200
re-exported; in 1978 there were 650 skins and 1135
watchstraps made from Yellow monitor re-exported, and in
1979 the re-import of 60 skins and the re-export of 4518
sq.ft. of skins of Yellow monitor was recorded.

The CITES reports of Italy have not listed imports but

the re-exports involve many reptile products stating India —
as the country of origin. In 1978 there were 16 cases made

from Yellow monitor, and 104 pairs of shoes made from
Reticulated python.
belts

and 25 skins, 2 coats, 747 belts, and 1738 shoes made from
Reticulated python.

monitor bags, also 1476 bags and 14,697 shoes made from ~

the Pacific monitor Varanus indicus - another species that

does not occur in India! %
af
records the —

The 1979 CITES report of France
re-export of 484 bags, 121 belts and 441 other articles

made from Ptyas mucosus originating in India, This species —

is not listed on the appendices to the Convention.

India does not record the export of any CITES listed
reptile skins or products in its annual reports (Reports on
the implementation of CITES 1976-80) but the CITES trade
figures of other countries further indicate that large scale,
presumably illegal exports have been continuing.

There were also 693 cases and 278 —
made from the Spotted tree monitor Varanus |
timorensis - an Australasian species not occurring in India! —
In 1979 there were 12 bags made from Estuarine crocodile,

sl
|
Again there were 1023 Spotted tree }

a

Year*

P951—52
1952-53
1953-54
1954-55
1955-56
5 ¥/
1958

| 1959

1960-61
1961-62
1962-63
1963-64
1964-65
1965-66
1966-67
1967-68
1968-69
1969-70
HOH O=7 1.
Oar 2
1972-73
1973-74
1974-75
1975-76
LOV6— 77
1977-78
1978=79
1979-80

Exports of tanned

Quantity

c. 87,989 kg.

Cen 2 7, Ow
c. 66,348
16a:
88,345
28,449

29 ,668.
61,420
53,802
Spall
WS), SLY)
1S Sy ales
167,149
132,058
alse, 228)
213,854
3,917,453,
2,692,803
2,169,629
1,607 ,043
ty Sil 36
2,186,030

1,092,143
1,910,568
3,164,577
27,138
921

3,926

7

reptile skins from

Value (Rs)

5,173,887
7,214,289
2,413,973
1,586,632
1,536,779
682,465
518,208
1,019 ,507
938,486
3,015,779
2,711,095
5,547,386
9,568,493
9,252,188
17,378,004
35,939,463
27,473,792
14,001,835
7,624,969
5,034,771
5,225,000
7,401,000
16,775,427
20,979,901
37,136,226
12,272,097
107,349
(627 TIL

* Years are usually from April to March.

- Source: Monthly Statistics Of Foreign Trade of India.

ind. ALT OF
ingia,;, lyDd'i- 5ovU

oo

Value per unit
of quantity

58.8 Rs per kg
56.8 uy
36.4 u
20.7 uw
17.4 "
24.0 a
IL eit) #
16.6: “s
17.4 ul}

452.2 Rs per kg

TABLE 4a Exports of tanned reptile skins from India, 1971-75
[TYPE OF SKIN | Country of | snl, ae [ae . ataree 1973 PTC ere wo 1975

and Dest i nat ton No. falue Valine Mo. Value Ve 6 Value
(TARIFF HEADING) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)
ERLE Lae cae ee) a ES (TE ee ae a |
12000 56908 23000 48923 27662 119899 f 151605 349409 | 35500 240725
Fed. Rep. of German 7500 §5955ij| eine? 0 as ae erm SON ZO 2525760) eee
WATER EE ae RE LPL) 110226 | Sra ee ae Soe el]
MONITOR Eri) 2a ed ee] a ] BN TT PEEL YTS
AEG 23200 107170 94879 _ 403984 _| 109600 801156 48818 400158 { 27573 ‘133324
, [A SOOM nn A ed Pee ee I i, ee es I ee aon COS Smee IIA
Switzerland SS ————— 37 97291.) + pa |
65000 105616 20852 62869 | 56355 523512 | $5000 —-261009| S000
PeUSACES" p> = Liana REN 2250 E2A1O#S ek oe rhe Sn eo a a RA | eReader oor | acer
TOTAL 263450 555393 | 145424 538320 | 158114 1003924 | 300522 2190234 | 294126 1585728
7000 323 (6 | Meche NIE | PRIS 2500) 264965 5000 32972 |) eRe
Fed, Rep, of German 3500 18825 7OCO 143 2256 is | CREE | 000 Le aia Sa)
ESET Vneerar aaa Be 1] ee | [ee Se a | ene Tin) EDS ae
138800 625892 68300 339147 26000 200610 78495 564365 | 21000 159006 |
United Kingdom 10000 26948 10000 25509 s | SER1 S000 ae OG JF Tae | a
Ra ae Baron) 12336 ie i el a or)
TOTAL 171400 749446 85800- 402214 95500 522292 85495 616196 | 21000 159006 |
(eA aaa a aaa i ae Uhe Tea il aay Be :
138500 359224 90062209664 15000 T4347 68852 383607 | 30000 185568
|__Fed. Rep, of Germany| 2000. 905) 150005942 | 4500 5664 [200 000 |
OTHER GiGi) RS ae a La 0) Lae Ee a SE 32369
LIZARDS | Saif ly SS TS | ES 2000) 93444 AD 1262013047 60S See ee ee STE see | SSO MENON TIF
159210 657280 204777 ‘(1133267 118940 761602 23179 171507 | 103652 767388
(1970-76 |_ Singapore | ‘5800 10157 St Eee aie Win en | 2G
6119505) ——— 7300 58357
(ESP igi LE 7 ee a ee Sa (44927 | > eee
[__United Kingdom | 49658130057 | 50214147574 | SIN I2 345427 | 136066 817140 | 170150 942443
TOTAL 397468 1295981 439737 1744141 244552 1291600 | 230297 1387746 | 381012 2308163
SrAusthlae er [ea Te RE ZAOTT F-90085 | aaa ae Bee)
SDA ae eae Da ee ae erie) fea ee ee Seen em pee ed
SNAKES miColonbaemantew eRe ere Pie ate ae ca. | 3045000) 306253! |taae ane I
(other than. | slOenmarksi meters Sp aS | 400 1739 1000 *@Q0lss( ae | aS
python) 33350 150998 228070 833169 253438 4687103 75992 _ 1525951
159910 791519 346901 2119368 201802 4377089
| S1970-Mar_77. |__ttal | 95503 100356 | 3327694608311 | 203495 680594 | 205863 2590791 _|_ 230609" 3549696
6119908) {Japan 11000 20270 30610 107720 34300 169270 44635 346962
131500 487257 | _157582 3484841
5000 NY irs) ae aoe ee Pe EN ta Sense fel
eeSwedeniot wae sa. ol | oie a See BOOLE © (9587) [200 et ESAS ima Mer me) NvUE foc | |
Geri ee Ee ey Ys I Re >
GEE ee el i ne a [Sra ree a eer Seen [PO ey ECC ee eS ey
245758 608842 184092 567886 319520 1115022 70123 1368323 | 364992 5477423
Et) ar) 20000 63339 114859 509586 1056 25577 | 718000 1076944
TOTAL 62817! 2057804 | 1018469 3396295 11382224 5930358 | 958964 16214660 |1046756 17155547
; United Kingdom aa ae (See 100 5507
ae ol 100

13981 Cana 3 Ca ae ae a es
17000 72646 __| 26600 (290065 a
[ee 1k esi
a. EE

[ee an ee Ce eae
(RaledsinapewotuGermany! amen -n wimmeae wen eran eal i Pca
REIRP INES aos ee ol (Ee as Sa (oa eee 6
Bi i ae Ie Saas a Se Pe eo CET
oe ee aE
30250 232002
(ae Le, Soe i re OG) (ee ee | RE ee 2] Toro] 157077
TOTAL 200 43a 90000 =—« 135576 46681 209812 88766 495153
ee Ge ee ee ee ee SS
eee oe eee es ee a
RT ee a Pa nee ey a LP a en | Pate oe ee Le |
BEA, aera | ET On SS a a | eRe a CI Meee ee |
(OCG omb genset ken. 8| ar Sea eR RD On Te | eae ee ee |e Pa Peeps SOOO MIE SOGbABI|
PES Desired sre hs TN | sD RN] MNP OO]? 3 TEI OG ANRINNNNEA IL ©) [| ae | OOO REannnE 5 G5 I | Meet nnn aren
510561 6107246 | 145492 1984412
Rep. of Germany| 182910 «903330 | 328128 1467864 | 365382 2342648 | 246696- 3738021
RE a et Ie eo eye Ee CEO a I a Sree!
271503 594809 | 386895 747919
449566 1984118 | 296540 1955962
TOTALS 2 9% | SetNett horal anids Silas." As | MR Alien iE WASTE
{SrA ese aS | TE OCD TTA ON VES 7 | Nia UR TSR | NIST OS | ORT B G95 RNIN 44255 | SR? LOR ORS
[Spain CS 80500503420 | 199000 646739 | 131500 487257_| 157582 3484841 | 63553 1109700]
GEILE TET SRE Se) RBS oo ine aa Ko? [nT aa a SR a ae (ee Se fie ee
p—Setesctand SE a 9
370616 871897 287544 2805261
ERS S Aa | PONE 750 NNN 74746 | ME ZOQOONEINN6 33359 MN 4G59uenSO95E6m| 88000

TABLE

YPE OF SKIN
and *
\CTARIFF HEAD!NG)

WATER MON| TOR
{1970-76
6119903
| 197879
| 6116907

)

OTHER MON! TORS
és 18508

OTHER L!ZARDS

———
6119905
1977-79
6116905)

« SNAKES
‘(other than
python)

1€1970-Mar 1977
lige

Apr_1977-1979__
SresOsy

}

|
| OTHER REPT! LES

(1970-76
6119909
| 1977-79
5116009,

TOTALS

4b

Country of

9

Exports of tanned reptile skins from india, 1976-79

1976 9 1978 1979
Destination No Value No. Value Kg. Value | Kg. Value
(Rs) | or Kg. (Rs | (Rs) (Rs )
cen | - ce 49g 4554
= | __528 36320 *
125000 459126 36329 | 39434 45543
144667 a | ss ty Miles, = OP Aeae
20000 144667 | |
mn 2 ae eee veer owe BY ghee pes ora nv ones
|
France 10000 45890 | Ls elie gb BEE See ee eee
Fed. Rep. of German 88913 660370! z : oF |
ee ee [2 weit fio Deis TER
68977 390927 200 kqu28750 tal) San aie linias tout aM ebyeveen cel Shyu
~— ligssacs Be Senden ste pal
| TOTAL 247063 1481369 300 ka 28730
Ae SBE I — = “| pee
AvfirehGa a 25000 K68Z000 RS aiae * a =o ns
France 148977 2665487 | 2483kg 1212872 | ae
Fed. Rep. of Germany| 896125 12661 369 23425N0 4107534 _| ———
hal Bete Sone | +10249kq beens iabbiccddeh
E 99k 17024,
330500 4265100 | 1794kg 2059676 |
45000 518648 | mT R
245000 3223598 | 2496kg 2057970 | eat © be
|_Switzerland 276192 2462462 _ a Br = d
|_ United Kingdom 969945 8614020, 4119kg 1821892 | a.
Shane {155001499979 | ~—:1960kg 1236325 | Oar a a eer
TOTAL 3052239 360788635 | 23425n0) 5693993
siete SRS rene hd 26200 KG gees z
| pi. i bd 7o9 186667
Hees A 80! 96349
ii) ie sir Sebi wenrs. if _Ravontts _sasertt| (20 [1000
cere | | 2142 334162
7 Fi aE GSA Senn
United Kingdom ie aaa E | L10kq 738 581 61399
TOTAL : | 10kg 738 r 801 96349 3552 593228
Africa 25000 168200 joe
Australia = ek 709 186667
MCANG imme ieee, Sek a a lS eee 494 45543
Czechoslovakia 801 96349
158977 2711377 2483kq 1212872 3 120 | 1000
Fed, Rep. of Germany| 985038 13321739 23425n0 4197534 528 56329
10249kq L
Hong Kong 10000 17297 se Lod one rade ake Wie
Hunga Sok qimamalliO24 ma pa rere re ae Sy |
P 399477 4656027 5094kq 2088406 J 2142 334162
Japan 65000 663315 = [ EEE ee ae
paln 45000 3223598 2496kq 2057970 [Sot SCH Nee
276192 2462462 [aid 5 emer sll
United Kingdom 1164118 9440031 4229kq_ 1822630 581 61399
115500 1499979 1960kq 1236325 in ease CO Sines alll
GRAND TOTAL 3444302 38164025 366 1okg! 252276! 1329 152678 4046 638771

Source: Monthly Statistics of Foreign Trade of India.

——

Little is known about the ways in which the skins leave
the country but some of the possible routes have been
documented. In August 1979 consignments totalling
150,000 snake skins valued at about Rs.6,000,000 were
seized in Calcutta, the majority at the airport. The
species involved were mainly Rat snake, Asiatic cobra and
Indian python. It was thought that Customs officials were
probably involved in the attempted smuggling (Anon
1979a). No other seizures of attempted export by air ar-
known but there is evidence of smuggling on an enormous
scale by sea. In April 1978 seven packages of snake skir.
comprising about 20,000 skins were retrieved by Customs
officers from the sea off Bombay. The packages had been
dumped into the sea from a boat which sank as it was
leaving for the Persian Gulf (Anon 1978a). The boat was an
Arab dhow and this case is an illustration of the important
trade thai takes place between the Middle East and India
(Miller 1980). This trade exists mainly for the smuggling of
gold into India from Dubai. Gold is a much sought after
investment item by the Indian people and a decision was
taken in 1947 by the new Indian government to halt the
excessive purchase of gold in order to stabilise the
economy. The old-established dhow trade then began to
smuggle vast quantities of gold into India via the west
coast and on their return journey they would take any
Indian produce that was of value to the western world. The
ban on export of reptile skins provided an ideal market for
the dhow trade and many thousands of skins have been
shipped to Dubai and thence to the European consumer
countries.

Small numbers of skins and articles are smuggled out
of India by parcel post. Several instances have been
detected by Customs in Bombay and in such cases the
address of the sender has been false (P.Kannan pers. comm.
1980).

Indian reptile skins are also exported via the
surrounding .countries. The consumer countries have
recently begun to import large number of skins from
Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. These
countries all require licences for the export of reptiles
skins and it is likely that few licences are being issued.
This is due to legal restrictions and because at least some
of these countries lack good populations of commercially
desirable species that can be exploited. Nepal falls into
the latter category and the authorities there, although
aware of this illegal trade, are unable to prevent it entirely
(B.N.Upreti pers. comm. 1980).

Although the export legislation covers all reptile
products it is apparent that the substantial internal
business in bags and other consumer products is geared
almost entirely towards the export trade. The Indian
people in general have no interest in reptile products
because of religious taboos or simply because they are too
expensive, and it is evident that the vast majority are
bought by foreign tourists. At present there is apparently
no publicity in the exit area of ports or the tourist offices
indicating that the export of reptile goods (and most other
wildlife) is illegal without a licence. Many foreign tourists
in the shops visited in the course of the study were
purchasing numbers of bags, belts and other products to
take home as presents and it is likely that all were
exported without any trouble. Also it was noted in
February 1978 that reptile skin products were openly for
sale in the government licensed shop in Hyderabad airport
(F.W.King pers. comm. 1981). This study was unable to
discover any information relating to confiscation of reptile
products from tourists leaving the country anywhere in
India.

10

Effects ci
the Role of Reptiles
Environment

Wild Populations and
in the

Unfortunately very little is known about the status of any
species of reptiles in India but some references indicate
that certain species are declining and threatened as a
direct result of the skin trade (e.g. Tyagi and Sharma 1980).

Whitaker (1978) mentions several examples of snakes
that have been affected by the trade. The Indian python is
‘now locally extinct in many areas’. The Indian sand boa
has been ‘extensively killed for its skin'. The Checkered
keelback watersnake 'Though probably the most common
and abundant snake in India, we have seen several local
populations wiped out bv intensive all-season collection’.
The Rat snake: ‘Entire populations have been wiped out in
some localities where they were formerly abundant...'. The
Asiatic cobra: ‘hunted and killed for their skins throughout
most of their range. Since 1973 the export of Asiatic
cobra skins has been controlled by the Government of India;
however, the market continues to flourish and some
tanneries deal in thousands of skins per day'. An expert on
snakes and their conservation in south India pointed out
that the collection of a few live common snakes for display
purpos.:s required the expenditure of far more time and the
coverage of a far greater area now than the same
procedure thirty years ago (Dr.M.V.Rajendran pers. comm.
1980). This presumably indicates a decrease in numbers
due to the skin trade and perhaps other factors. Three
species of Indian monitor lizard - Indian, Desert and Yellow
- were included in Appendix I of CITES in 1973 at the
request of both India and Bangladesh presumably because
they were acutely threatened by trade. Daniel (1970)
referring to the Indian species of Varanus mentions the
scarcity of this fonce common lizard' and
Dharmakumarsinhji (1978) noted a decrease in monitors and
snakes in Kathiawar (Gujarat).

Some of the snakes important in the skin trade are of
great economic value as rodent destroyers. It is possible
that as much as 20-50 per cent of India's grain crop is
destroyed annually by rodents (Whitaker 1978). The Rat
snake is particularly important in rodent control - a single
individual may kill hundreds of rats and mice annually.

Conclusions

It is evident that the present situation in India 1s
unsatisfactory. The existence of an extensive intérnal
trade is not compatible with the present protection
legislation and export ban. Whilst reptile skins are freely
available the incentive to kill more animals and smuggle
out the skins will remain. Certain populations of some
reptile species have already been adversely affected by the
skin trade and local extinctions may continue to occur.

Tourists will continue to buy and export reptile
products as long as the retail market and the lack of
checks at export points continue.

Many consumer countries will continue to import
certain Indian reptile skins and products because once
items inade from species not listed by CITES have been
successfuily smuggled out of the country they can be
legaily. imported into many countries without documents
from the country of origin.

11

9vOZBE

808 bs

(0)
00026822

OQOO9bs
000SSZ&
10)

eanyjen Adi 4uend
0861

O8-9/6L ‘eipuy worl $9l4juno0D SNOleA OU! SUIS ajizdau jo s}40du}

*syuodxe ueypul

veri

O6v 60%

8r66r

0009 t< |Z
0001922 O

Q00£ 1S
0002 P82

(0)

0009rs |

an|e,

8261 LL6\ 916)

‘uoy6usysem ‘eouewwog yo *ydaq sn “Get 14 V eINpeyos sp4sodwy jespueg sp

“Bd1J4O JEOL4SIFE4S OS1OXZ BP SWOLSNO'W'H “WopbUly PetlUy SY4 FO SOL4S!4e4S pet} feuso4xy
‘uojyeyoossy 44}4ey ueder *Asyunog Aq Aft | pouwog :sj4odwj pue sfuodx3 uedep

"Buoy Buoy {*4daqg solys!yeys pue snsuegQ *SO!14S!4Fe}S Sperl Buoy Buoy

“086! ‘a*a ‘S!IIEM

*y4ode4 Siyf 40} aw} 4 Ul pauseygo fou se4nBy 4

ay, Ul peajoAuy euam Aue yeyy Ajayxyjun Ss} 4! 4g Gujpeay ff }4e+ Sy} UJ sponpoid ys|} Sepn|ou|

*,se0e!d, Ul Ss! Yo!YyM ysn 40} 4deoxe By u! Ss} Ay} puend

bocce | cS8 1b

SlOILz v98Z9

(O0S6S0Ib - O8-8/61
GGbOsO|v - LL-9461)
deyyee| e|14de4u pesseiug

(Q00ZSO!v - 08-8261
G610SO01v - LL-9L61)
deyyee| e|)4deu pessespuy

(0099101 - 08-826!

ZILIIOIY - LL-9261)
sulys Mey

OOO8ZOvP (ZOSOIb) xSUINS PouUe}—|Wes} Ssetq U}

(9BIO1V) xSUIAS PE4ND/Pea|}I!d

OQOOLE ZZ
0005 18s |

(OZZSO0 lv) 4Jeyusee| p4ez!y
(ZZZ101b) SULyS p4ezt)

(166119) Jeyyee; 9) 14doy

OOOLZ |
0002962
OOOL9Z

(O£6S0)b) xSU!4S Pessed0iq
(O0ZSO01b) xSUI4S PeuUe}— Was
(O99101p) SUIysS Mey

44 4}

oAtiquend] enje oAdiquend | enjer oAd!puend

Hy tse)
pue ujys $o edd

G AjA1gVvL

gsn ul “1e
1Z) sulys mey = WA

(VSO* lv) SUI4S MeY | - JONVY4

Acknowledgements

This project would not have be@n possible without the
United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife
Service which funded the fieldwork entirely. Also various
members of staff particularly D. Ferguson and G. Bertrand
provided encouragement and advice right from the
beginning. In India much help and advice during the
fieldwork and comments on the original draft came from
many Government officials, particularly N.D. Jayal,
formerly Director of Wildlife Preservation in India, and his
four Regional Assistant Directors. Also WWF (India)
particularly Anne Wright and the staff of the Eastern
Branch. Thanks are also due to John A. Burton for help in
setting up the study and comments on an early draft of this
report. Especial thanks to Clare McCormack for the
typing and design.

References

Anon (1933). The collection of reptile skins for
commercial purposes. Imperial Institute, London.

Anon (1948-1973). The Wealth of India: A Dictionary of

Indian Raw Materials & Industrial Products. Publications
and Information Directorate, New Delhi.

Anon (1978a). Rs.9-Lakh snakeskin haul from sea. The
Times of India, April 11.
Anon (1978b). Snakes being killed indiscriminately. The

Statesman, May 19.

Anon (1978c). Irula Snake-catchers Industrial Co-operative
Society. Hamadryad 3(3):6.

Anon (1978d). Introducing the Irulas. Hamadryad 3(1):8.

Anon (1979a). Smuggling of snakeskins: more arrests

likely. The Statesman, August 18.

Anon (1979b). Snakeskin smuggling continues. World
Wildlife Fund - India, Newsletter No. 30.
Anon (1980a). Snake skins seized from _ tannery.

Hamadryad 5(3):7.

Anon (1980b). Record of Imports to Japan, Part 1:

Alligator and Crocodile Skins (from 1950 to 1978). Elsa
Nature Conservancy, Japan.

Batra, N.D. (1979).
Times, December 28.

Snakes skinned alive. Hindustan

Biddapa, Preeth I. (1980). Reptile skins: Trading under the
counter. Himmat, March 21.

D'Abreu, E.A. (1933). Notes on monitor lizards. J. Bombay
Nat. Hist. Soc. 26:269-270.

Daniel, J.C. (1970). A review of the present status and
osition of endangered species of Indian reptiles. IUCN
Publ.(N.S.)No.18:7 5-76.

Deoras, P.J. (1970). Snakes of India. National Book Trust,
India.

Department of the Environment. Reports on_ the
Implementation of the Convention on International Trade
. in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora in the
United Kingdom, 1976, 1977, 1978.

Dharmakumarsinhji, K.S. (1978). The changing wildlife of
Kathiawar. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 75:644.

12

Dutt, S. (1979). Sea turtle notes from Visakhapatnam.
Hamadryad 4(2):2-3.

Fuchs, K.H.P. (1976). Chemistry and technology of novelty

leather. FAO, Rome.

Gill, Raj (1981).
Times, February 25.

Stop this wanton killing. Hindustan

Groombridge B. (1981).

Amphibians and Reptiles.
London.

World Checklist of Endangered
Nature Conservancy Council,

Grove, N. (1981). Wild cargo: The business of smuggling
animals. National Geographic 159(3):287-315.

Mack, D., Duplaix, N., and Wells, S. (1979). Sea Turtles:
Animals of Divisible Parts. International Trade in Sea
Turtle Products. Report presented at the World
Conference on Sea Turtle Conservation, November 1979,
Washington,D.C..

Miller, H. (1980). Madras Diary. Hamadryad 5(3):7.

Miller, N.N. (1980). The Indian Ocean: Traditional Trade
on a Smuggler's Sea. American Universities Field Staff
Reports !1980/No.7, Africa/Asia.

Nichol, J. (1977). Reptile skin exporting from Calcutta.
Hamadryad 2(2): 10-11.

Rosenberg, H.I. and Gans, C. (1976). Lateral jaw muscles
of Elachistodon westermanni Reinhardt (Reptilia:
Serpentes). Canadian J. Zool. 54(4): 510-521.

Smith, M.A. (1935). The Fauna of British India: Reptilia
and Amphibia Vol.II Sauria. Taylor and Francis, London.

Smith, M.A. (1943). The Fauna of British India: Reptilia

and Amphibia Vol.II]_ Serpentes. Taylor and Francis,
London.

Sujan, M.A. and Trivadi, V.D. (1976). Smuggling: The Inside
Story. Jaico Publishing House, Bombay.

Swiss Federal Veterinary Office. Annual Reports to the
International Secretariat on the Management of the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
of Wild Fauna and Flora in Switzerland 1976, 1977, 1978,
1979.

TRAFFIC (U.S.A.) (1981). Analysis of 3-177 Declaration of
Importation documents, Law Enforcement Division, Fish
and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior.
Unpublished report.

Tyagi, H.R. and Sharma, L.L. (1980). Threatened reptiles of
Udaipur. Tigerpaper 7:27-28.

Viswanathan, K. (1979). A short note on snake-skin trade
in Tamil Nadu. Unpublished.

Wallis, B.E. (in press). Marketing Assistance Programme
for Agricultural Products from Least Developed Countries:

Market Prospects for Reptile Leathers. International
Trade Centre UNCTAD/GATT.

Whitaker, R. (1978). Common Indian Snakes.
New Delhi.

Macmillan,

Whitaker, R. and Daniel, J.C. (1978). The status of Asian
crocodilians. Tigerpaper 5(4):12-17.

Whitaker, R. and Z. (n.d.). Endangered Reptiles of India.
Madras.

Whitaker, Z. (1976). Skin industry.
Trust, Newsletter, May 1976.

Madras Snake Park

Recommendations

l.

Urge the Government of India to:

(i)

(ii)

(iii)

(iv)

(v)

(vi)

ban the internal trade in skins and products. The existing stocks held
by dealers could be taken over by organizations such as the State
Trading Corporations. Alternatively the export ban could be lifted for
registered stocks with a stipulation that dealers must reduce their
stocks by at least 25 per cent a year, thus ending all trade within 4 or
5 years;

improve enforcement of legislation in India to control illegal killing
and selling of products;

provide greater publicity to the details of Indian export controls for
the benefit of foreign tourists;

instigate Customs checks for reptile skins in commercial consignments
and for products exported by tourists;

encourage education of the people of India (especially the tribals
involved in catching snakes) in the need for conservation of reptiles;

propose the Rat snake Ptyas mucosus and the Asiatic cobra Naja naja
for addition to CITES Appendix II to stimulate international
enforcement of their export ban.

Urge the Government of Japan to withdraw their reservations under Article
XXIII of CITES relating to the three Indian species of monitors Varanus
bengalensis, V. flavescens, V. griseus.

Encourage studies on the population status of commercially important
reptiles with a view to formulating management plans for controlled
exploitation of venoms and skins.

. <<
PS 3 eae
Dh etn

Ae oar
e es