1 edt ropes ¥ r ? ‘ me Hi ot > ab . isa j $ I nternational A\tiigator Crocodile AMIN 535 & 2 <5 pve aN mARY ag Gente 1 1m La FARA uollS Ann Centre INTERNATIONAL ALLIGATOR AND CROCODILE TRADE STUDY A collection of papers on the international trade in crocodilian skins compiled under contract by the Wildlife Trade Monitoring Unit of IUCN's Conservation Monitoring Centre and TRAFFIC( Japan) 1988 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2010 with funding from UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge http:/Awww.archive.org/details/internationalall88ashl CONTENTS Foreword. J. Don Ashley Introduction J. Don Ashley The world trade in classic crocodilian skins since 1977. Alexandra M. Dixon and Jonathan Barzdo. Exports to Europe of Crocodylus niloticus skins from Sudan. Alexandra M. Dixon and Richard Luxmoore. Japanese imports of crocodile and alligator skins, 1970 - July 1986 Alexandra M. Dixon, Tom Milliken and Hideomi Tokunaga. 55 67 © Ashley Associates, Inc. on behalf of the International Alligator/Crocodile Trade Study, P. 0. Box 13679, Tallahassee, Florida, USA, 32317 and IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre, 219c Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, UK ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The people who were responsible for the production of this volume are acknowledged separately at the beginning of each of the constituent three reports. However, the whole project would not have been possible without the efforts of the International Alligator and Crocodile Trade Study panel and staff members. They are: Ted Joanen, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Tommy Hines, Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission Ginette Hemley, TRAFFIC (USA) Bruce Thompson, Texas Parks and Wildlife Service Frank Shoemaker, US Fish and Wildlife Service Dennis David, Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission Don Ashley, Ashley Associates, Inc. Pamela Ashley, Ashley Associates, Inc. Funding for this project was provided by the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Texas Parks and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. I nternational Altiigator Crocodile n ay ienanay | y y A 1+ " 2 1 fey : ‘ a vw ‘ gheiwotion wie pttaubounr ed? iol -iieinasy er eat ie Bilneed ¢ it tevow oll iprnee rigaaoy ‘Gi te De’ De ea Sod s4f te gots eget pottaciet ol od? . tpi kw afte “wad svet Pag. Leow Voe Lot a ; wie peal oe Te iy Qi thre a ase iad PO" aH: bap’ aod} rt : ab Perey eetvedert, don; ottib;>¥ a0. Sobuniwa ait retowieeyt. Sas ewe wal i ey mi . f i ps - Ny: Nee, a 8 wud 2 O wttlel pas cl'eet. van | A ae beh WILLOW ‘foe test ; - mopwaline Aen veya) bus oma). where ar | pte rh ways | phat) set aboomkes aay atid hd sol yh h bebe r ® : he oui te: poner misters wf oid ee bal <¢ kew Lcebosd, eke eho hoe Lslnk) eae Us heaaiaal Pepe irs ; nae ‘poe iv ont ban wb ee 4 es soe * oo * sag | FOREWORD I hastily wrote a foreword to the IACTS Study in December 1986 in an attempt to publish the present report prior to the sixth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) in 1987. For several reasons, the final report has been delayed until now, and the view from my desk today as these words are penned is somewhat different from the mid-air urgency I felt en route to Africa that winter day more than a year ago. Much is the same, however, and I believe the words I wrote then express the meaning and purpose of the IACTS Project as well as any that could be more carefully chosen today. "It is Fitting I suppose that this must be written in mid-air somewhere over the Atlantic headed again for Africa. First landfall will be Dakar, then Monrovia, Lagos and finally Nairobi. Kenya will make the 24th country visited in 24 months on behalf of the IACTS project. "From there, if talks go well and everything looks right, I will go on to Khartoum to plan the first phase of the Sudan Expedition. Maybe it will happen in early 1987. Maybe it won't happen in our lifetime, but someday it will happen. The crocodiles of the Sudd will be better managed and protected. Conservation through utilization will be better understood. The value of renewable natural resources as national treasures will be more widely appreciated. Not only in Sudan, and not just crocodiles, but with all wildlife in all the wild places they live around the world. "It is the purpose of the IACTS project to help achieve these things by collecting historical trade information and putting it into the hands of scientists. Given the research data, the technical experts can then better advise governments of the best available options to manage their crocodilians sustainably. "The IACTS project is aimed at collecting historical trade data, including, wherever possible, sizes of skins as well as numbers. We want to know how they are harvested, when and by whom. IACTS seeks to produce useful and practical information as well as factual data. All are threads to an extremely complex web linking crocodilian protection to research, research to management, management to utilization and responsible utilisation to conservation. "A most encouraging and useful aspect of the IACTS project, considering the frequent past confrontations between those who seek only to protect crocodilians and those who seek only to harvest and use them, is the co-operative spirit of trade, government and conservation organisations working together. This has required a certain level of understanding - that may in time lead to trust - which reflects a new confidence that scientific facts will eventually determine the best balance between total protection and unregulated exploitation. IACTS is systematically searching for the credible answers to these difficult questions. "While many people have had a hand in originating this study and in keeping it going, a few deserve very special thanks: Ted Joanen, whose foresight and technical skills helped originate the study; Jonathan Barzdo, whose persistent hand and counsel has kept all phases of the project on course; U.S. Senator John Breaux, who intuitively recognized the value of the study, not only to his own State of Louisiana, but to every country that has crocodilians and seeks to conserve its natural resources; to many, many people in the trade, who for now would perhaps just as soon not be mentioned individually, but without whom this effort “ , | : ae we OE GURL vedmenaty wt etwdR ZIOAT ads OF wremenu? » adcow .ylisead Ng id Ye phivome | F 4 of nedae’ d4gQu4 Seong wt “tod kdug o3 temmidal, ai Abe vt teaolfansa a's | neldac Vita or mD wt- aektsa md , Te wit bneeae) Gatewns yon | PSE wl faeelt: Bees Pati. du zdineq? bevugneba” @o Nebod Yaad ¥ 9. weekly wat: Bok plow F22as biggles Teed cot cqes LemED ” Sion 2:4 94 a 9) or Dia -2ks WO hein he datieon ai betes 5 frayew anedd aes O02, of don’ owas See e Oe? eyo) & aashly- ped ‘ My> OK. 6 sa lieee ot. sears 7a 4 ‘hem tow. bit eve ita J ibe pet! atecds GITh ieee ebom ed pitas tatt ¥ga-es Maw ef doel wy BRP wht to ‘ maeltweumae’ 9 ia tek a pt Sivm: ged eee \y iS wack , ig. ay : a ee BD hs ‘Sede OY fii [eh shoeT e017" pels a iiesn Hableon nthe l dA ee a Hee eta eeagny LY 1 ween paeetake” vite? one” Oey a 28 Mae * sooner h ersaa ate’ 7 Oaied vo atten Yt 41 ot tk ay ith. t at, gatooet paldsqoere wie Fits ates: a Elie bb ate apis bbeyne aahed wil! to tag Tes L" rik Yobsines Sud, Wehr dott, ed ne Hegel Fem, recs aes bee bomanam, | ved ted Pere a bhiag pe YO eel ero hil ( o W@oTsAgibi Le ye Shiw. nodded Oisy Herons: iserrigea at SEI Seesdes. Seas i ian wa Seorvower Lara tia ofdrwacs. dy ; Sie (Patina bea Sunt = Om fing sabe etih ven. ptt 4 es oo \yesae: wn boyent? wii seuadn Rilw ont ven ‘Ait Sawa wen Vine. ner Bobi hin: wid} ancquis ‘eleteledda quad weet blogs. | wtetet obi em 3 tou Ye se J eos tod ,des7? bre wilted Beenliaos sleds Ke ane | a tomes ‘ge Se. albtas eld iota im beth enpees ar bn TY Dadar oft ety as : ere ey ote ae wad vet sa e tinwihoied "ie OHa° San i24ete add 2] Soper, B1AT) ead ier? 66 AF Haw eC yodd Dealt rT Pind , bing retté Home bie arta an bey Le: naiet cg Oe tore 1 WAT vitae ozudienls. Aiwame cy “4 iw eaeepbum: am } eidween ve)! yaa —s Lp et wach og 4a. Ghideveeentes wi, i yak. “ee Shee Se 7 @ort aa . ‘ a ee ; 7 : Pee eis 24 KO ae Be weed dy a wad. whine Doe. mY) bARGH i whats aoe Y ote oe eT tee ; : Ean ‘ f < ohn, Fendt wewds, aw BOF 1 tn etoar etd bake Wal ace? ,s2lasseua. whens ie b, ; ¥ sheds le uvande wd? BO wai! dive, al bg il Bae "ube eh poTRBA, od ai ip, Rare i Hie ttt fon yolddne>s wb bese opfibosone oH! Rakeb 03. RGR Gh unanidors oh ieusob of tte dun’ ont i @hdim Weargore ae aoa 8700) offer 82) sboee” eT se euainen (iinawed’ onl iso thre srowgoteves neste. iyi haay a me: ane eaanial SMa Lined tivo semmatgorg Rok “ayasee “~ “— ROY, | eo Bie: pr “pe We aire dit} et: : dandonbas — eGLAAN ADE Pe ee ete - | \eedapbal to 64 aan : scale th hte i wd a ORR nD raed ebahs Lav? 7 ailatapes Shin jowtort @7Oki add .zl = eet odkeat!: 3) Siontee Lagek. ot odeat RTL, wants o> “ona ect. bw) , ; bs Det be e0a57. oy ‘on a. eM. INTRODUCTION by J. Don Ashley For the past two years the IACTS Project has organised a co-operative effort between trade, government and conservation organisations to document historical trade in classic crocodilian skins. The goal of the Project is: "To obtain a better understanding of international classic crocodilian skin trade and evaluate its effects on the management and conservation of crocodilian resources." The IACTS Project was developed because of the significant long-term investments by both the public and private sectors in developing wild harvest, ranching and farming programmes, and to investigate the "stimulation of trade” argument (that exporting even legal skins into world trade only stimulates more illegal traffic to satisfy demand). Estimates of world trade in crocodilian skins have ranged from 300 000 to 2 million skins a year and rarely has a distinction been made between classic and caiman skins. In addition, little effort was made before 1984 to evaluate the relationship between the emerging legal trade and the illegal markets, or the impact of one on the other. Therefore the following objectives for the initial study were adopted by the sponsoring wildlife agencies in Louisiana, Florida, Texas and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in co-ordination with the Wildlife Trade Monitoring Unit of IUCN’s Conservation Monitoring Centre and offices of the TRAFFIC Network: 1) determine the sources and volumes of classic skins from 1977 to the present; 2) delineate transaction patterns and identify inadequate reporting based on the requirements of CITES and other regulatory agencies; 3) provide insight into how the trade in legal skins may, or may not, affect illegal trade; and 4) develop recommendations to appropriate government agencies and CITES. In pursuit of these objectives the IACTS Project has succeeded in obtaining significant, previously unpublished, historical trade information to improve our understanding and to provide a better basis for evaluating crocodilian management and conservation efforts worldwide. Based on more than a hundred interviews with representatives from the trade, government agencies and conservation organisations in more than a dozen countries, as well as data— gathering projects by the Wildlife Trade Monitoring Unit and the TRAFFIC Network, we were able to estimate past and present classic skin trade more precisely. The present IACTS Report is divided into three parts: 1) world trade statistics from 1977 to present based on CITES and Customs reports; 2) Sudan as an example of an exporting country based on dealers’ data; and 3) Japan as an example of an importing country also based on dealers’ data. While this is obviously a limited amount of information compared to the complexity of total world trade from all regions, the IACTS Project has been able to reach some initial conclusions: A eae eeitek wim br on Nee ‘a ; sey | SaINGO~ oO: @ baphaagto und dsederst? BYONE wed e24Ry ced Ueng.end veR eeosh 6S eqdldacinegto aokjavapenioos bya, Janet KeVGR ~ Outs neewsed atte tw ye end, we Reed eft bred dbl peosn erent shay Feo ie : ae tasbesagts wad Ya nie hegoley vi sinw Yalinn? reat > Aaeerad bliv sriqgosevet ad waedies viewing bam a/ Myo aid Kio gd es ny aes Jo potdalomise" obs odeylireynt 4) “bes: pbatmargeery geleant bas gatdone petatum) do. etre abiras. bisqw mia aide eget jneve ‘sri taqias sone) ‘team ak ead al biowe So eatenised: Abpamdt viwiane oy pit ion’ -lenedel: oom ’ Daa | 7. petal wor tite Sf GOO COL mitt bagews. Wek sctde ne ebbone AL + Rae led ‘bow; pheeat> Abawied ebur Crna noidowltnia « apd 0 fein, eats wteukevw od BURY wreted when ag srohtn: 01530) wee rare inhaerd re ee eoeaneecamn wid bas abars twee! galpiews’ add eee 1 dPe epvdoond ae gal ‘intak oe wad ont faba sb. apivangi whiLbTiw gabe ie a. | fPeldseitre. oo) Gt aa iyset Ae Dhl dws Sle ane oeaeene me hte Fi9nAOD “oe ‘a tdewes but earmliag noiinivness, cheat ee etic has TZTIS to SdqaMo slo pas ats: aa ae F id meee ody msi edint deg h vei wuiewong Bi ' bra ,abqaa Regal tt aoe Thee nevag ttedagoraas ot can lepmnqemtany ge i oe wie ‘aevizootdo evedi te ttytong rr Pigeon ‘payotvesy ,anamdtiaghs snd (8 abivarg | 03 bie yoibandonebas ge ie ania bak Jamnn perm at adie avetwaeseit | es al “pap ider (neato. ot Aa Tht iw af? wl bdgelorg. sole phan’ Vannl Hi. od Pcie ‘vans a dauaker bie. nanerer ec) wel tt a Introduction a) Based on preliminary analysis of IACTS data and interviews with dealers, international trade in classic crocodilian skins has decreased substantially in the last 15 years. b) Dealers generally agree that total trade is now about 150 000 classic skins a year. c) This amount is less than half the estimated annual trade, of 300 000 classic skins a year, in the early 1970s and less than a third of the peak trade in the 1950s and 1960s, which may have reached 500 000 skins a year. d) A combination of over-exploitation, habitat destruction, trade treaty restrictions and consumer advocacy are factors contributing to the decline. e) Government-managed wild harvests, ranching and farming operations in Papua New Guinea, United States of America, Australia and Zimbabwe, as well as quota harvests in nine African countries and Indonesia can account for approximately 80 000 legal classic skins a year. f) Based on these estimates, at least 40% of the classic skin trade is still unregulated, but the trend is definitely toward better management and regulated trade. g) The collection of historical trade data from dealers, particularly if it includes size classes of skins, can provide useful data, and in the absence of other comprehensive population monitoring programmes, may be a very economical and practical gauge of a species status. Based on these preliminary findings the IACTS Project has recommended: 1) All crocodilian skins should be tagged. 2) An international Crocodilian Unit (perhaps similar to the CITES Ivory Unit) should be established to monitor trade in skins on a regular basis and ensuring standardised methods of data collection. 3) A dedicated funding base for international trade and population monitoring efforts should be established. 4) The annual reports of Parties to CITES should include sizes as well as numbers of skins exported from range states under a quota system, in accordance with a proposed recommendation approved by the CITES Technical Committee. 5) Enforcement efforts to reduce illegal trade in crocodilian skins should be increased, particularly in importing countries where they will be more effective. 6) CITES export quotas for crocodiles should not be increased and new quota proposals for caimans should not be established unless efforts are made to collect historical trade data, long-term population monitoring programmes are initiated and more effective enforcement programmes are implemented. The usefulness of historical trade data to range states that are currently developing management plans for their crocodiles is readily apparent. The Sudan Study, in which primary dealers collaborated to provide historical data on both numbers and sizes of skins, underscored the conservative nature of that country's initial export quota. And while other problems in Sudan may for the time being make it difficult to implement fully a population monitoring programme, or improve enforcement, the trade study has 4 ft ie nal wboadad yWeelavh dsiw Vandal Bha 6286 Bag > pkey late tsiim jira, > Beea® ta. . witeliasseduea } rae G6 aatte dgiitt 3 jigas is al whee? Lenaidanzetn! — =e ~ at a : ¢€i al ; afi Sines: * Sieee oon. 1 2 $ #5 y ’ L ? é 2 = mt 4 igs - By 4 1 COL de ahes ede ze ons i pes ie us “i ; Snwces ta? {> ; ini’ wig. 2c A5 £ ies uote to ee ee site ciewals veo oni badts a gam A e ,aeeRl bas 200i eff ai -ebard S ysaeis @hsns =, a L ¥ures as ot igen» ingle ln febe-seva -:.%¢ yi tentame | (Bo eniiseb #43 ef gate 14n06 trctnes War Paecourht~20su roc2 ) ene viaeae? ‘auge At em faeoogd. pultiss bad ‘anitpont adeivead bite. Hogenom.4 genquved 4a) ejoup. ce Iinw os ound’ Rasa” KrLe Seed. RD NeRA BO Beted? bedicl. ,weoleD wok” ‘efotaai evI9O8. apy japosng) en iauieeet Dud eel aaaivos noaittA onto «i's jeovund - ; eae sany 8 eolayooiee Lazot 008 ORY Ei}oe #2 obwnd mite Sheed. ots We Bem jidwod ie . jenisze seets a: paws RF bas | dames caer Aetsed . hopes ‘Siesiniteb- ci -baesd -2d3 ioc , besalonenee: 7 br: : : i : a? id fosaleged, = — ; L ri +i " piteurtrie bathed: o-etah ebead Lawisedein siteetlo> off , lo enderds ody a) Bae: dah Idee. hives een .enide 3 reeeiy, aate fobotm : “Keptnenooe, -—: Ss hal ‘= «Writ 6 40 *higodiedm apiteaiaqoe. ovitneterga 40% au ° » asm taisn lt a tO Oguag taatenal ua big. F Et i: . a — : = ae ae re Pony a, vbebanmaoey oH Abatons HTDAL edd Aan! ' Jhteggad. oc Divoda enfae ns ‘Poe ; ) 2 = “paltels eqacsea! Sha? gettivesed) dsavissnaesat - 2 en Aa a ie 2 ee |e ney oo me da tidete d biworte ie , saalnat 1 eGR AO Bdnddeer > barren cde galawena Did a ean g % ~ an sbevs favs as ks. s08 ened tevin d Eds 4 : : OS “weleet.ac sitoqes Levans 64 ie 03 oo [oS Re) beFeoqse caida 10 eo eden “i a es = eegeniueenml Petaeee: e éete ‘eszehaatae \ eae — . wed jdeaio ~ te _ z — Introduction provided a basis for conservative export quotas that allows the country to utilise its natural resources better and provides a definite incentive to improve further its crocodile management plan. Another positive example is offered by Malawi where the Wildlife Department has completed a survey, among hunters and resident buyers, on the skin trade there for the past ten years. This historical information provides invaluable data on which to base estimates of sustainable future harvests and size composition of the skins. If similar information could be provided to Zambia, for example, which has been diligently collecting size data on its skin exports under the quota system since 1985, then the database for justifying the present or increasing harvest levels or ranching proposals is much enhanced. Since further quota proposals in Africa will include other species besides the Nile Crocodile, there will be an increasing concern over regional impacts trade will have on these species. The Congo for example has obtained export quotas for the Dwarf Crocodile (Osteolaemus tetraspis) and the African Slender-snouted Crocodile (C. cataphractus). While it might not be possible or practicable to collect all the historical trade data on these species from central and western Africa, a regional effort aimed at gathering as much information as possible from primary harvest areas like Congo, Zaire and Central African Republic, would be helpful in developing management plans for future harvest strategies. Certainly knowing the relative percentage each species represented in historical harvests would be extremely valuable to countries like the Congo seeking now to harvest all three crocodile species. Similarly, countries that were unsuccessful in their 1987 attempt to increase their CITES export quotas, such as Madagascar, could substantially strengthen future requests by incorporating historical trade data (including skin sizes) into their proposals. While a good start toward this goal for Indonesia is provided by the historical trade data supplied in the report on Japan in the present volume, a much more comprehensive view would be given if Singapore would co-operatively provide the same. What would be very helpful now for the future management of crocodilian harvests would be the direct support and assistance from European and Singaporean trade groups in collecting past and present trade data. Certainly the invaluable assistance of the All Japan Reptile Dealers Association and other European tanners to this IACTS Project has provided the most comprehensive study to date of the world trade in classic crocodilian skins. Similar co-operation by other trade groups and tanners in the future will be necessary if we are to improve Further our understanding of the management and trade implications of harvesting and marketing classic skins. It should be emphasised that historical trade data gathered by the IACTS Project can be provided directly to the range states, or IACTS can support the request of individual range states to trade groups like the French Federation of Reptile Tanners, the International Reptile Products Association and other groups to provide the historical trade data directly to the country of origin. In either case the purpose of providing more comprehensive data on which to base Management plans or future harvest strategies is served. As supplies of classic skins to the market increase during the next few years as a result of more successful management, ranching and farming Operations, it will be important to both producers and tanners to be able to project annual classic skin production accurately. In fact, three- to five-year future harvest level projections will prove valuable to the trade and enable producers, tanners and manufacturers to plan their marketing strategies better. Aoldvebedinl ° re dt co —— Ni ii esiowor. of WWelfe aadd, dedonp Pregse euigeysbsnos, 90) Bikad 6 | babs vay ‘ae ’ eed ev linesa e7iniied «&: eabivuny . by siidted @ecsnieer | Lat wath: wat tida \ se AalG Soemepedia. 04 | Dor: ti) Zedgs0? eF rian 't a : rate : wilidbiiw.. «ads a That ‘wit Tail bail beyetic ei u leone ee evisinve jarisaea eA) oo ,ereved saebi cps Bis...2: am Of “ane you's #.. Beteidaos Ral dors teaet eebivow osisawsotns tawinn inde. lar eieec ved deat ofl: ae) exeds eoboat Wie Bag estavoad anesl | ¢f det ketene be codanigge eesd of -duidh no inte eldatiaves oe? habivend of Bivon nealipeowtel Wrhele V2) —hi Ae #62. % wolldeogues wee ei) fo eeeh .aaty pate wie Gidnegitib Weert aye fold wi gon'/ a i) 2 Leer si aral 203 ‘subtetod «62. ene COR) O7nZ4 matiye «hove whi whew “Ed OCRe he t) wieyogeig snigownt ia" adevie ebieed: grie@enans 26 Jneeory 0d? the 4 ' satowds nile autiad toi AbEeRA bl aheveQnri adony nodteoyd - ekte fanelges save. tenes giiteaaaont. ha oo Tile ovec’ 0? “dikadin) bedvodetal ') ew) nein obets do wit. whee Leoingabia «cs (le suatios od witesty — ae. gnitonting, op heater grate (atipen * ,oo1¢iA). rvethen nae hoe atlas, ; ae: ett, ‘are deevia! hae! ng ray T whet pe ; as a o%F “mod ato race dang “igh ale Enbqle it wh bigew., of laveot a0 a es 2 Gabe em eiadiasra® Pek gede pte owt weesverd fesinetdtd.. of Bete sua Y dawirand Gwen gnitenn agent, a2 o2ht | vos ery ‘coe ‘hell 7“ Mernwmbsvie sti 3604 -aniadanon ~ehan lie a <7 be Wah hetewp Javgee SeERO siete ae bess i “fa Shitifeqroond 40 steongiet: etude? ; 908 brewer guage houg. » ofide ALaeeqorg vlads etek iy orig: bear te eherd Laoingsel dt aft Ge bad iverg el % 4 - ot ie Anan . «iN mami aie @aogays doestn oft ad bhm Agila giitvettos af! squang shard, Margit SLA mid t> voeeseleee 4 ‘ SIRT oe ‘ad arewond = Nee bhatt zon edd Ww ogad od youie: evden be ue ih Thad 2attier.ed vols of Sid weit 63 ae - bal ; , may . i _ ' cy ye t is . ha r ay / , aor Ti " artives Rag ': ul i aay ee a 7 ‘y i ; es p ¥ a a’ se -loaiaatt “a i db aeNingl shart 4: te. ik y ? oe Ce ee a) ar 9 bal webs ay eee « yi bene ae ah. gies ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank the staff of WIMU for all their help - notably Sheila Butler for typing the report, John Caldwell for the data processing and Kim Lochen for assistance in the preparation of the figures. Richard Luxmoore updated the report to include 1984 data. Graham Usher kindly collected the Indonesian Customs data from Jakarta. gidetda)~ Stee xia 7 wes oo eA me gotogvariq @esad ads -ae8 cre ‘ , . : Z i - ‘ eepeari.; 1:06 4 wd Bagnellos World Trade INTRODUCTION This report was produced by the Wildlife Trade Monitoring Unit of IUCN's Conservation Monitoring Centre under contract to the International Alligator/Crocodile Trade Study (IACTS). The objective was to review and analyze the existing CITES and Customs data pertaining to the world trade in classic crocodilian skins since 1977. It was also intended that the report should identify areas where the data are incomplete, missing or inaccurate. We have used Fuchs' (1975) definition of '‘classic' skins, to indicate skins that are ‘non-ossified' (see also King and Brazaitis, 1971). Amongst crocodilians, these are derived from Alligator mississippiensis, Crocodylus spp., Gavialis gangeticus and Tomistoma schlegelii. The methods of analysis of the data are described in the appropriate sections. It should be appreciated from the outset that the data sources are of limited value; the limitations are referred to in the text. However, it should also be recognised that CITES and Customs data are the best comprehensive statistical sources available. The report is presented in three parts: a summary and review of the Customs data; a summary and review of the CITES data; and a region-oriented discussion of the results. CUSTOMS STATISTICS Methods The foreign trade statistics for all countries known or suspected to import and/or export classic crocodilian skins were obtained from the Statistics and Market Intelligence Library of the UK Department of Trade. Data were examined for the years 1977-1984 (where available). Customs data do not indicate the species involved. Therefore, in analyzing the data the only indication of the species concerned is the country of origin of the skins. The bulk of skins coming from South America are known to be of Caiman spp. For this reason, the South American data are for the most part particularly difficult to interpret, even where any useful interpretation is possible, and they were not collected for this exercise. Crocodilian skins may be classified under Customs Commodity codes which indicate whether the skins in question are raw or tanned. Some countries, such as Singapore and Thailand, distinguish the condition of the skins further, specifying, for instance, whether leather has been "tawed, dyed or designed" (Thailand Trade Stats.). In such cases where there is a specific category for crocodilian skins, the analysis of the Customs figures is relatively straightforward and the data can be interpreted to present an overall picture of the commercial trends of that country's crocodilian skin trade. Unfortunately, the commodity categories of most countries' published trade statistics are not sufficiently specific to allow the analysis of their crocodilian skin trade. Many countries group all reptile skins together in one category, and in some cases fish skins are included as well. For example, all of the EEC countries engage in this practice, and three of these, France, 9 World Trade Italy and F.R. Germany, are known from their CITES annual reports to be major traders in crocodilian skins. For these countries, and for any others which adopt similar broad classifications, it is impossible to identify from the Customs statistics alone the volume of trade in crocodilians skins. A certain amount can be determined by extrapolation from the trade statistics of other countries which do identify crocodilian skins. However, extrapolation must be undertaken with caution. Significant differences in quantities reported by importers and exporters are frequent, even when both countries are using the same Customs category. The reasons for this have been described elsewhere (e.g. Bhagwati, 1974). Furthermore, some Customs statistics only list the countries of consignment, so that it is not always possible to determine the country of final destination of goods exported or the country of origin of goods imported. These limitations to the usefulness of Customs data are important in that they make it impossible to do more than produce broad indications of the commercial trends and a minimum estimate for the volume of trade. The following countries have been found to specify crocodile and/or alligator skins in their Customs statistics (see Tables 17 - 25). Indonesia Ivory Coast Japan Malawi Papua New Guinea Singapore Somalia Sudan Thailand : Zimbabwe Indonesia Customs data for Indonesia were only available for 1981 and 1982 (Table 17), recording 16 671 kg in 1982. Exports of "Dressed Snake and Crocodile Skins" were also recorded, but it was not possible to separate the two groups of reptiles. Whitaker et al. (1985) quoted figures obtained from the Department of Trade (Branch Office), Irian Jaya, indicating that crocodile skin exports from Irian Jaya alone amounted to 1399 skins in 1981 and 560 in 1982. Ivory Coast Customs data for the Ivory Coast were available only for the period 1977-1980 (Table 18). These record small quantities of raw skins exported, with a peak of 728 kg in 1978. Unfortunately, the statistics do not identify the destination or country of consignment. Japan Japanese trade statistics are evaluated more fully elsewhere (Dixon, Milliken and Tokunaga, this volume). They are extremely important insofar as Japan is one of the major importers of raw crocodile and alligator skins. However, Japan did not specify crocodilian skins in its export data during the period evaluated, but instead included them in the broad category for skins and leathers not elsewhere specified. As this includes anything that is not from a domestic animal, it is impossible to identify the amount of crocodilian skins or leather being exported. Japanese Customs import statistics specify two categories of crocodilian skins: 41.01 271 for raw alligator and crocodile skins; and 41.05 210 for alligator and crocodile leather. According to the Japanese data, imports of raw crocodilian skins have risen by 163% since 1977, (see Table 19). Most of the skins come from South American countries and are therefore not likely to be classic skins, but in 10 World Trade 1980, 1981 and 1984, the number of skins imported from South America dropped slightly, and so the proportion of skins imported from South East Asia and the USA was slightly higher. Imports of raw crocodilian skins from Papua New Guinea, Indonesia and the USA have risen considerably, in absolute terms, since the late 1970s, reflecting the increase in Japan's total imports (Table 19). Japanese imports of raw skins from Malaysia and the Philippines have been low throughout the period, never more than 360 kg of skins coming from the Philippines except in 1979 when nearly 1500 kg were imported. Imports from Malaysia (Peninsular Malaysia and Sabah) have generally been small but 1400 kg were reported from there in 1981 and 1100 kg in 1982. Imports from both Thailand and Singapore however have in some years exceeded 6000 kg (1977, 1979, 1980), but declined to almost nil in 1983. In 1984, there was a rapid recovery of trade to nearly 2500 kg from Singapore and 5600 kg from Thailand. There appear to be few recorded imports of crocodilian skins from African countries; Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa and Zimbabwe are listed only occasionally and with relatively small quantities involved (see Table 19). In contrast to the import trends of raw crocodilian skins, Japanese imports of crocodilian leather have declined, from a peak of 20 510 kg in 1979 to 7141 kg in 1984 (Table 19). Malawi Malawian Customs statistics (Table 20) record exports of raw crocodile skins to Europe (France and Switzerland), Japan, Zimbabwe and South Africa. The quantities are relatively small however, a maximum of 1673 kg being recorded in 1978 and no data appear to be available for the years since 1979. Papua New Guinea Until 1981 Papua New Guinea (PNG) Customs reports recorded its exports of raw crocodile skins only in terms of value (see Table 21). This provides only an indication of the commercial trends and does not necessarily reflect the volume of trade. The value of skins exported peaked in 1980 and then dropped by 19% in 1981. Unfortunately, no more recent Customs data are available. Singapore Crocodilian skins fall into three commodity classifications in the Singapore Customs data from 1979 to 1982: Crocodile Skins - Undressed (2119921); Crocodile and Alligator Skin Leather - Undressed (6116911); and Crocodile and Alligator Skin Leather - Dressed (6116912). For 1977 and 1978, there is a category of Undressed Crocodile Skins (211901) but unfortunately, the categories for dressed and undressed leathers also include snake skins. Thus, the quantities of imported crocodilian leather cannot be determined. A further complication is that, from 1983, Singapore's statistics no longer specify crocodilians at all. It should be noted also that Singapore is not known to report any of its imports from Indonesia which is probably an important source of crocodile skins. Table 22 contains Singapore's published trade data for the period 1977-1982. Total imports of raw (undressed) skins and leather combined peaked at 58 563 kg in 1980 then declined by 44% to 31 722 kg in 1982. On average over 94% of Singapore's imports of crocodilian skins are raw. From 1977 to 1979, South-east Asian and Australasian countries were the main sources of skins. Since then, South American countries have become increasingly important suppliers and, in 1982, accounted for 77% of Singapore's imports of raw skins. In 1977 and 1978, the biggest single contributor was Papua New Guinea but in 1979 Colombia took this position, Singapore importing 15 270 kg from this country. Colombia has remained the 11 World Trade most important source since then. In contrast, imports from Papua New Guinea have declined. Other notable sources of skins have been Malaysia, especially Sabah (1977-82), Venezuela (1978), Japan (1980), USA (1981), Uruguay and Paraguay (1982) (see Table 22). ‘ Singapore's Customs statistics record both domestic and total exports. Most of the "total exports" represent re-exports but in some years there have been notable quantities of domestic exports reported. Combined exports of raw skins and leathers reached a peak in 1980, at 92 461 kg, 99.6% of this being raw skins. Thus, 1980 was a peak year for both imports and exports. Comparison of the import and export totals over the period 1977-1982 shows that in every year considerably larger quantities of crocodilian skins are exported than are imported (see Table 1). This is likely to reflect, to some extent, the imports from Indonesia that are not recorded in Singapore's data. It may also indicate other unrecorded imports or some level of illegal trade. Table 1. Singapore's crocodilian skin imports compared with exports. Total Imports Total Exports Net Exports (kg) (kg) (kg) 1977 28022 88364 60342 1978 37520 63773 26253 1979 49731 59834 10103 1980 58563 92461 33898 1981 37772 75495 37723 1982 31722 44566 12844 NB: The figures for 1977 and 1978 are for raw skins only. Source: Singapore Customs statistics According to the Customs data, the majority of Singapore's exports of raw skins went to France, but both the volume and the percentage of skins going to France have declined since 1980. As a result, the exports to Japan (the second most important destination) have assumed increasing significance. Somalia The trade in crocodile skins from Sudan is examined in greater detail elsewhere (Dixon and Luxmoore, this volume). The latest Customs statistics available for Somalia refer to 1979 (Table 23). While it cannot be said that Somalia is indicated to have been a large-scale producer of raw crocodile skins, the recorded volumes of trade for the period 1977-1979 show a substantial increase, from 10 kg to Italy in 1977 to 1432 kg, in 1979, all to Italy. In the absence of more recent data, it is impossible to determine the trends of Somalian trade on the basis of Customs statistics alone. Sudan Sudan reports widely fluctuating exports of raw crocodile skins (see Table 24). France and Switzerland were the principal countries of consignment From 1977 to 1980. No data are available for 1981. In 1982, France continued to be an important consignee but Saudi Arabia-was the destination of 54% of the skins exported and the UK of 16%. 12 World Trade Thailand The Customs statistics for Thailand (Table 25) show that this country imports and exports crocodilian skins and leather. These data also indicate that the quantity of Thailand's exports of raw crocodile skins has declined. Unfortunately, detailed analysis of the data is hampered by inadequate records. For the years 1980 to 1982, for example, the appropriate categories for crocodile leathers do not appear in the published export figures. Presumably during this period any exports of crocodilian leather were included in the categories for reptile leathers. The imports of both crocodilian skins and leathers during the period continued to be recorded in the more specific categories (see Table 25). Recorded exports of raw crocodile skins have dropped from a peak of 13 619 kg in 1977 to 1265 kg in 1982 (Table 25). The majority of the skins exported since 1978 went to Japan according to the Thai data and comparison with the Japanese import data shows a relatively good correlation (see Table 2). The Japanese data for 1984 record a big increase in imports from Thailand (see Japan section). Table 2. Trade in raw crocodile skins from Thailand to Japan. Exports from Imports to Thailand Japan (kg) (kg) 1977 0 (0) 1978 4104 4576 1979 5365 6035 1980 4463 4008 1981 - 2885 2885 1982 1265 1299 Source: Customs statistics of Thailand and Japan. Imports of raw crocodile skins (Table 25) have increased over the period for which data are available (1980-1983) and, with the exception of 540 kg from USA in 1981, they all came from Singapore, totalling 9170 kg over the four years. Thailand's trade in crocodile leather indicates declining trends in voiume of both exports and imports. Imports dropped notably in 1981 (Table 25) and the recorded quantity for 1983 represents a reduction of over 98% from that in 1977. Exports of leather have been very small; 20 kg to Malaysia in 1978 and 97 kg to Italy in 1983. Zimbabwe Customs data for Zimbabwe are available only for 1979 and 1980. These record exports of 490 kg in 1979 and 1954 kg in 1980. No details are given of the destination of these skins. 13 World Trade CITES STATISTICS Methods Data on the crocodilian skin trade were examined, from the annual reports submitted by the Parties to CITES for all years from 1977 to 1984. These data record the species (or other taxon), the countries from which goods are imported and to which they are exported and, in many cases of re-export, the country of origin of the skins. Several points should be made clear regarding the application of these statistics to the analysis of world trade in crocodilians. 1. As the relevant CITES annual reports cover the period 1977 to 1984, it should be remembered that many countries became party to CITES in the course of these eight years and there were far fewer annual reports submitted in the earlier years than more recently. 2. The quality of the reporting, i.e. the detail and accuracy of the records, has improved considerably over the years. This fact, together with the increased number of Parties, means that any apparent trends in trade over the period are not necessarily a reflection of any real trends but may merely reflect improved information. 3. The quality of reports varies between Parties. For example, until 1982, Japan recorded most of its crocodilian imports as either Alligatoridae or Crocodylidae. In some cases, the species may be inferred from the country of origin or export but this is not always possible and should only be undertaken with caution. 4. Even when countries of origin are indicated, these are not always accurate and species are frequently recorded as originating in countries where they do not occur. 5. The CITES data used refer to trade in skins, but in some cases the trade has been reported by weight, length, width or area of skin (and in one case as ‘pairs of skins'). These reports have been included in the tables of data but, because any standard conversion factors are likely to be somewhat dubious, only the trade reported by number of skins has been used in the analyses for the present report. For this reason and because the number and quality of annual reports is still deficient, the data presented are likely to underestimate the actual quantity of trade. However the underestimate may not always be significant since it appears that quantities reported by weight, area or length by an importing country are frequently reported by number of skins by the exporting country, and vice versa. Using the data from CITES annual reports, the minimum gross and net volumes of imports and exports were estimated for the commercially predominant species. The quantity of trade reported in the other species is referred to in the relevant species sections. The CITES annual report statistics also include data on countries of origin of re-exported skins and, for some species, these have been used to obtain a further indication of the amount that may have originated in each country. Where there are data on a country of origin only from re-exports, these have been taken to indicate the minimum quantity of trade from the source country. However, where there are also data on direct exports from a possible country of origin to a re-exporting country, the largest of the two figures has been used, to avoid double counting. It should be appreciated that this is a somewhat simplistic view since skins are not necessarily re-exported by a country in the same year that it imported them. All the tables in this section are derived from data in CITES annual reports except where otherwise specified. 14 World Trade APPENDIX I SPECIES Crocodylus acutus American Crocodile Crocodylus acutus is found from Florida south through Central America to Ecuador and around the Caribbean Sea (Groombridge, 1982). Until 1979, the species was listed in Appendix II of CITES. However, in that year the population of the USA was transferred to Appendix I and in 1981 all other populations were moved to Appendix I. The change in volume of trade in skins appears to reflect this transfer (see Table 3). The net trade for this species from 1977 to 1984 was 45 467 skins (Table 26). Table 3. Minimum gross world trade in Crocodylus acutus skins. Appendix I Appendix II 1977 1250 1978 2360 1979 3588 1980 2 39950 1981* 291 10901 1982 421 - 1983 599 - 1984 106 * = Year in which all populations were transferred to Appendix I. NB: For net trade see Table 26. Data for the period 1977 to 1979 show a steady increase in the volume of trade, but this may only be the result of improved reporting. In 1980, the quantity of skins reported increased by an order of magnitude, possibly reflecting anticipation of the transfer to Appendix I. However, by far the major importer of skins that year was Italy which imported 29 210 skins from Paraguay, where the species does not occur. This is an unlikely route for the export of C. acutus and it is therefore possible that these skins were wrongly identified. From 1982 to 1984, the only recorded importer of more than a hundred skins of C. acutus was Switzerland whose imports were from Italy and France. The last two countries have imported large numbers of skins in previous years (see Table 26) and their recent re-exports may be of old stocks. The only country to have entered a reservation on this species is Switzerland; but this was withdrawn when C. acutus was transferred to Appendix I. No commercial imports directly from potential countries of origin have been recorded since 1981, but in that year 2811 were imported to Italy from Panama. In 1981 Colombia was the only specified country of origin for re-exports, where the species occurs; the net trade of Colombian origin being 3793 skins. Crocodylus cataphractus African Sharp-nosed or Slender-snouted Crocodile This -species occurs throughout western and central Africa. However, details of status and distribution of C. cataphractus are limited. The species has declined overall owing to hunting, and loss of habitat, and it may be experiencing increasing pressure as a result of the decline of C. niloticus 15 World Trade populations (Groombridge, 1982). Table 4 shows the minimum world trade volume in C. cataphractus skins. No trade was reported in 1977 and 1978. Most of the trade reported subsequently was of skins moving from France to Italy and in 1979 this was the only trade reported. Table 4. Minimum world trade in Crocodylus cataphractus skins. 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 GROSS 3736 11306 8420 9105 12679 2030 NET 3736 11256 8192 9027 7615 2030 A net total of 41 856 skins were traded between 1980 and 1984 (see Table 27). ‘Italy was a net importer of 39 440 skins in the period 1979-1984. The only other notable net importer was Denmark (208 skins). The only possible countries of origin which appear as exporters are Congo and Gabon, although exports reported directly from Congo were only significant in 1980, 1983 and 1984. If the data on countries of origin reported by re-exporting countries are also considered, the totals of skins emanating from these countries of origin are substantially different (see Table 5). It is believed that some of the C. cataphractus skins reported as exports by Congo are in fact misreported skins of C. niloticus (Caldwell, pers. comm.). Table 5. Minimum gross trade in Crocodylus cataphractus skins reported as exported From or originating. in countries where the speicies occurs. 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Congo 3165 9209 6509 6663 4967 2030 Gabon - 811 1612 585 2044 - Mali - - c= 980 975 - Togo 571 779 4 S = = Zaire - - 289 616 - - TOTAL 3736 10799 8414 8844 7986 2030 Thus according to the CITES statistics, Congo has been the major source of C. cataphractus skins. This country acceded to CITES in 1983 and did not enter a reservation on this species. Of the other source countries, Togo and Zaire have been Parties to CITES since 1979 and 1976 respectively. Thus, C. cataphractus products from these countries should no longer be in commercial international trade. Gabon and Mali are not Parties to CITES. The only countries that have entered reservations to CITES on trade in this species are Austria (imported 33 skins in 1983), France (reservation withdrawn 10 Dec ‘84), Italy (withdrawn 1 Jan '84) and Zambia (no trade reported). World Trade Crocodylus intermedius Orinoco Crocodile This species is restricted to the Orinoco drainage of Venezuela and Colombia, where it is now extremely rare. Its decline has been attributed to severe hunting for the skin trade (Groombridge, 1982). Up until 1984, no trade in the skin of this species has been reported in the annual reports of CITES Parties. Crocodylus moreletii Morelet's Crocodile This species is found in Belize, Guatemala, Mexico and possibly Honduras (Groombridge, 1982). According to Abercrombie et al. (1982), in the past there has been a regular trade in C. moreletii skins between Belize and Belgium but this is likely to have declined in the wake of recent legislation and the ratification of CITES by Belgium effective from 1 January 1984. Only small quantities of skins have been recorded in trade. F.R. Germany imported at least 113 skins from Italy in 1979 and 342 in 1980. The USA reported imports of one skin in 1980, one in 1981, four in 1982 and two in 1984 that were seized as illegal. No country has entered a reservation to CITES on trade in this species. Crocodylus niloticus Nile Crocodile C. niloticus is widespread throughout Africa. However, the species is subject to severe pressures from hunting and habitat loss in much of its range (Pooley, 1982). From the inception of CITES, this species was listed in Appendix I. The population of Zimbabwe was transferred to Appendix II in 1983, to allow trade from ranching operations. In 1985 the populations of the following countries were also transferred to Appendix II, subject to annual export quotas (shown in parentheses): Cameroon (20), Congo (1000), Kenya (150), Madagascar (1000), Malawi (500), Mozambique (1000), Sudan (5000), Tanzania (1000), Zambia (2000). Table 6 summarises the gross and net trade in C. niloticus skins from 1977 to 1984. Although the data for 1980 indicate an order of magnitude increase in trade over that reported in 1979, this is much more likely to reflect improved reporting rather than an actual increase in the trade, although there may have been some increase. Table 6. Minimum world trade of Crocodylus niloticus skins. 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 GROSS 1285 175 7572 24082 30003 27111 34879 6510 NET 1258 175 3706 22094 22253 20101 28983 6115 The minimum net trade recorded from 1977 to 1984 was 104 685 skins. Table 28 indicates clearly that for most years Italy appears to have been the largest net importer of C. niloticus, with net imports of 68 727 skins over the same period, accounting for 66% of the total. France is the second major net importer, although it only appears as one in 1979, 1983 and 1984. This is largely because before 1983 it only reported re-exports, not imports, and the African source countries reported few exports. France's gross exports indicate, however, that this country had been obtaining large supplies. These exports totalled 11 608 skins in 1980 and 10 390 in 1981, and.it is not known what proportion this represents of the skins entering France. Italy and France both held CITES reservations on this species, until 1 January 1984 and 10 December 1984 respectively. 17 World Trade It is worth noting that, despite its increasing market for crocodilian skins, Japan does not appear to be importing many skins from this species and has not held a reservation. This may be because the traditional markets for C. niloticus have been European and the historical commercial arrangements between the African countries and Europe are well established. It is evident though, that Japan is trying to increase its share of the market for African skins, and a delegation of Japan's reptile skin dealers’ association toured Africa in 1985 with this aim. Of the potential source countries, the major exporters reported since 1980 have been Sudan, Togo, Nigeria and Somalia, in that order (see Table 28). Somalia is not a CITES Party and Sudan's ratification only became effective in January 1983, with a reservation on C. niloticus. However, Togo and Nigeria have been Parties throughout the period; they have not entered reservations on this species, moreover Nigeria does not issue any CITES export permits. The other countries which do hold reservations are Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe. None of these appears to have been a significant exporter until 1984, when Zimbabwe and Zambia became the major sources. If the reported countries of origin of imports and re-exports are considered, then a slightly different picture is obtained. Table 7 indicates the minimum gross trade reported for the specified countries of origin and export that are potential origins of C. niloticus skins. Table 7. Minimum gross trade in Crocodylus niloticus skins reported as exported from or originating in countries in which the species occurs. 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Botswana 1158 6 3 - 3 - Cameroon - - 1781 1718 22 - Chad - - = = 71 - Congo 185 834 442 165 3 - Egypt 24 - - 2 - - Ethiopia - - - - - 1 Gabon - 476 620 - - - Kenya - - 1 1 - - Liberia - - 230 418 521 336 Madagascar 1 - 4 20 32 5 Malawi - - - - 341 415 Mali yu 1785 2781 3137 2026 * 345 Namibia - - - 14 - - Nigeria 1 6730 10304 4373 * 731 1 Somalia - 1266 847 - 1 469 South Africa 3 2 403 2 - 32 Sudan - 3885 7123 * 5035 * 15422 = Swaziland 1 - - - = = Tanzania - - 3 5 15 7 Togo 1746 1806 818 2817 3560 - Zaire - - - 603 - = Zambia 4 - 2 - 167 657 Zimbabwe - 12 476 1667 1835 4268 TOTAL 3123 16802 25838 19977 24750 6536 * an additional quantity of trade was reported by area or length. From Table 7 it is evident that Mali and, recently, Zimbabwe have Ange been important sources of C. niloticus skins, even before the transfer of Zimbabwe's population to CITES Appendix II. The effects of the transfer of 18 World Trade nine further populations to Appendix II remain to be seen. It is noteworthy that, with the exception of Sudan, Zambia and Zimbabwe, the populations of all the principal sources of C, niloticus up to 1985, remained in Appendix I. The withdrawal of the reservations within the EEC appears to have had a profound. effect on the patterns and levels of trade in crocodilian skins. There is some evidence that the imports of C. niloticus increased in 1983 in advance of the new regulations, but the decline in 1984 is indisputable and substantial. Crocodylus palustris Mugger or Marsh Crocodile The range of C. palustris includes parts of India, Iran, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and possibly Bangladesh (Groombridge, 1982). Up to 1984, only one skin had been reported in trade. There is some experimental farming of this species in India which could lead to commercial production (Luxmoore et al., 1985). Crocodylus porosus Saltwater Crocodile (see Appendix II section) Crocodylus rhombifer Cuban Crocodile This species is endemic to Cuba (Groombridge, 1983). Up to 1984 no trade in its skin had ever been reported in the annual reports of CITES Parties. However there is believed to be some trade in skins, of unknown origin, emanating from a crocodile farm in Cuba (Luxmoore et al., 1985). Crocodylus siamensis Siamese Crocodile C. siamensis once occurred in Indonesia (Borneo, Java and possibly Sumatra), Kampuchea, Lao, Peninsular Malaysia, Thailand and Viet Nam. It now appears to be extinct in the wild (Groombridge, 1982). Trade in C. siamensis is not surprisingly very small and probably all comes from Thailand's Samutprakan Crocodile Farm. Only Thailand holds a reservation on trade in this species. Moreover, the Samutprakan Crocodile Farm has been registered by the CITES Secretariat as a captive-—breeding operation entitled to an exemption on CITES Appendix I control with respect to trade in C. siamensis. According to the CITES data, Japan imported 300 skins from Thailand in 1981, 200 in 1982 and 800 plus 1445 kg in 1984. The only other trade reported in CITES statistics since 1977 is two skins imported by the USA. The Samutprakan Crocodile Farm reports exporting 1500 crocodile skins (of all species) to Japan and 1100 skins to France from 1980 to 1982. These _ skins may have been from C. siamensis, C. porosus or from hybrids between the two (Luxmoore et al., 1985). Gavialis gangeticus Gharial G. gangeticus occurs in Bangladesh, India, Nepal and Pakistan and is nominally protected by legislation in all these countries (Groombridge, 1982). No trade in skins of this species has ever been recorded in the annual reports of CITES Parties. Tomistoma schlegelii False Gharial T. schlegelii is restricted in range to the Malay Peninsula, and the islands of Borneo and Sumatra (Groombridge, 1982). It is farmed on a small scale in Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand (Luxmoore et al., 1985). However, no trade in its skins has been reported in the annual reports of CITES Parties. 19 World Trade APPENDIX II SPECIES Crocodylus acutus American Crocodile (see Appendix I section) Crocodylus johnsoni Australian Freshwater Crocodile C. johnsoni is found only in northern Australia where it was depleted by exploitation for the skin trade, which was curtailed by protective measures being enacted between 1962 and 1974 in four States (Groombridge, 1982). Although it is in Appendix II, it has been totally protected since 1974, and banned from export since 1972. CITES annual report statistics record fluctuating quantities of skins in trade, totalling 8739 skins over the period 1978 to 1984. No trade was reported in 1977 or 1980; 4133 skins were recorded in 1978, 2915 in 1979, 300 in 1981, 610 in 1982, 624 in 1983 and 157 in 1984. All skins were reported as re-exports From France, with Switzerland importing 7868 (90% of the total) and Austria importing the remainder. Crocodylus novaeguineae New Guinea Crocodile C. novaeguineae occurs in Indonesia (the Aru Islands and Irian Jaya), Papua New Guinea and the Philippines (Groombridge, 1983). Two subspecies are listed in the CITES Appendices; Crocodylus novaeguineae novaeguineae in Appendix II and Crocodylus novaeguineae _mindorensis in Appendix I. Some taxonomists regard the two as distinct species (Groombridge, 1982). Table 8 summarises the world trade in C. novaeguineae skins, on the basis of CITES annual report data. These indicate that the total net trade from 1977 to 1984 was 233 882 skins. There was also a large quantity recorded in other units for which there is no satisfactory conversion factor (see Table 29). Table 8. Minimum world trade in Crocodylus novaeguineae skins. 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 GROSS 24900 59179 53067 29858 31941 14370 34938 34539 NET 17252 44938 42046 27536 31336 14293 27325 29156 Papua New Guinea (PNG) and Indonesia are the only important sources of C. novaeguineae skins. PNG, the principal source, has not submitted annual reports to CITES for the years 1981 or 1982 and this probably explains the apparently very low volume of trade from this country in those two years. Moreover, the PNG report for 1980 only provided data for the first half of the year and these were included with the 1979 report. Thus the CITES data used for 1979 are inflated and those for 1980 understate PNG's exports. However, Hemley and Caldwell (1986) report export figures based on information received from PNG's Department of Primary Industry (Table 9). These can be compared with records in the CITES statistics of direct exports from potential countries of origin and re-exports where the countries of origin are reported (Table 10). Comparing the tables, there appears to be no correlation between the two sets of statistics; in fact neither is even consistently higher than the other. The average annual export from the Department of Primary Industry's data (23 611 skins) is somewhat higher than the average indicated by the CITES data (17 396 skins) over the same period (1979-1983) and the first figure should be taken as a minimum. 20 World Trade The level of exports from Indonesia is recorded in Table 10 and appears to have increased from about 1500 skins in 1981 to over 7000 in 1984. Table 9. Exports of Crocodylus novaeguineae skins from Papua New Guinea. 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Wild 34836 27249 14290 23259 13807 Ranched 646 460 731 1474 1304 TOTAL 35482 27709 15021 24733 15111 Source: Hollands in litt., cited in Hemley and Caldwell (1986). Table 10. Minimum gross trade in Crocodylus novaeguineae skins reported as exported from or originating in countries in which the species occurs. 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Indonesia 6271 6064 1154 3851 1455 3503 6977 7391 PNG 14740 38970 41160 13976 15097 5812 10934 22606 Philippines - - - - 60 * - - - TOTAL 21011 45034 42314 17827 16612 9315 17911 29997 *60 Crocodylus novaeguineae mindorensis skins were reported as imports to USA. This subspecies is in Appendix I. The principal reported importers of C. novaeguineae skins from 1977 to 1984 were Japan (66 727 skins gross), France (55 802), Switzerland (52 239), Italy (34 039), Singapore (27 967) and USA (28 372). Japan, Switzerland and to some extent Italy have imported large quantities throughout the period. Japan became particularly important in 1983 and 1984, accounting for 46% and 49% of gross world imports in the two years respectively. Trade to France, Singapore and the USA has been sporadically high but data on Singapore are poor because it is not a CITES Party. The figure for imports to France is also deceptive because it is derived only from the data of exporting countries. France has re-exported a total of at least 123 735 skins over the period, an average of over 15 000 skins a year; it may have been importing much more than this amount. Thus it appears that France was previously the biggest importer of this species but that its position has now been usurped by Japan. Crocodylus porosus Saltwater Crocodile The range of C. porosus extends from Sri Lanka and the east coast of India across coastal South-east Asia and the Philippines to Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands and northern Australia (Groombridge, 1982). It is considered to be depleted throughout most of its range, adequate populations existing only in parts of northern Australia and New Guinea. In 1979, all populations except that of PNG were transferred from Appendix II to Appendix I. However, most of the skins in trade appear to have Originated in PNG which is why the species is included in this section. In 1985 the populations of Australia and Indonesia were transferred to Appendix II; the former, to allow trade from ranching operations, and the latter with an annual export quota of 2000 for 1985 and 1986. 21 World Trade Table 11. Minimum world trade in Crocodylus porosus skins. 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 GROSS: 16109 +=17074 15037 3691 7388 2247 7169 6431 NET: 13931 11541 9188 3391 5134 2117 5398 5358 Table 11 summarises the gross and net world trade in C. porosus skins from 1977 to 1984. According to these data, the volume of trade in C. porosus has declined considerably since the species (except PNG population) was transferred to Appendix I in 1979. According to CITES annual reports, PNG is the principal country of origin (Table 12), but Indonesia is also an important source country, and Malaysia has been a minor one. Neither of the latter two countries holds a CITES reservation on this species and any exports from them since 1979 are potentially in contravention of the Convention. Table 12. Minimum gross trade in Crocodylus_porosus skins reported as exported from or originating in countries in which the species occurs. 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Australia - - - 35 - - - - Indonesia 3877 2415 375 - 1155 126 345 - Malaysia - 77 74 - 186 56 - PNG 6089 9119 7424 2479 3147 651 4554 5239 TOTAL 9966 11611 7873 2514 4493 777 4955 5239 Table 13. Exports of Crocodylus porosus skins from Papua New Guinea. Source 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Wild 7442 5717 3915 3926 3155 Ranched 184 80 366 927 301 TOTAL 7626 5797 4281 4853 3456 Source: Hollands in litt., cited in Hemley and Caldwell (1986). As PNG is the major source of C. porosus skins, the same CITES data problems exist as for C. novaeguineae (see above). Again, however the exports reported by PNG's Department of Primary Industry (Hollands in litt., cited in Hemley and Caldwell, 1986) (Table 13) can be compared with the CITES data on skins exported from or originating in potential countries of origin (Table 12). LS) 2 World Trade As PNG has not completed annual reports to CITES for the years 1980 to 1982 it is not surprising that the CITES data for those years show smaller exports from this country than do the figures from the Department of Primary Industry. The average annual export according to the latter is 5203 skins, and this should be taken as the minimum export from this country. On the basis of gross imports reported (Table 30) it appears that the major importers from 1977 to 1984 have been F.R. Germany (13 892 skins), Switzerland (13 932), France (12 762), Singapore (10 506) and Italy (9604). Japan's imports have not been quite so large but it is noteworthy that in 1983 this country appears to have been the single biggest importer of C. porosus skins. Again the French import figures are deceptive, since its re-exports over the eight-year period total nearly 29 000 skins, implying a minimum average import of over 4000 skins a year. Austria, Japan and Thailand all hold reservations on this species. F.R. Germany withdrew its reservation in July 1982, Switzerland in January 1983, Italy in January 1984 and France in December 1984. Alligator mississippiensis American Alligator A. mississippiensis is to be found across the south-eastern USA from North Carolina south to Florida and west to Texas (Groombridge, 1982). In Louisiana, increased numbers of Alligators have permitted the development of a state-managed harvest (Joanen and McNease, 1982). In Florida a pilot programme has been operating since 1981 to supplement the stocks of Alligator farmers with eggs taken from the wild (Luxmoore et _al., 1985). Nuisance Alligators are hunted in Florida; limited hunting is allowed in Florida and Texas (Hemley and Caldwell, 1986). In 1979, this species was transferred from Appendix I to Appendix II of CITES in recognition of the increase in populations and there has been a resultant increase in trade. The total gross trade appears to have declined slightly since 1981 (see Table 14) to 32 388 skins in 1984. As the USA is the only original source of skins, this makes estimation of the total entering trade for the first time relatively easy, because there is only one country to take into consideration. Table 14 shows the gross US exports on the basis of CITES annual reports. Table 14. Exports of Alligator mississippiensis skins. a 1977 1978 - 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 a Gross US Exports 0 325 5404 8994 29298 25835 20069 21519 Gross World trade 0 325 5470 13087 43945 39359 38997 32388 Net World trade 0 325 5338 4901 15793 17021 16913 12968 i Table 15. Exports to France of Alligator mississippiensis skins from USA. EEE 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 ET s S ee keh ND ale ES tare 9 i Se Ee ee Eee US Exports to France 5404 8990 18180 14016 10676 9236 Percentage of Total 100% 99.9% 62.0% 54.3% 53.2% 49.9% US Exports ee 23 World Trade France appears to be the destination of the largest quantities of A. mississippiensis skins exported from the USA (see Table 31), although the overall percentage of US exports going to France has declined (see Table 15). Many of the skins exported to France have subsequently been reimported to the USA, presumably after tanning. Italy is the other major importer of A. mississippiensis skins although many of these appear to come via France. The quantities reported over the period 1981-1983 were relatively stable, at around 9500 skins, but fell in 1984 (Table 16). Table 16. Italian imports of Alligator mississippiensis skins from France and USA. 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Direct from US 0 8037 6056 3981 5393 Imported from France (0) 968 3568 5426 0 TOTAL fo) 9005 9624 9407 5393 Japan appears to be the only other destination of significant quantities of A. mississippiensis with gross imports of 5355 skins in 1982, 10 463 in 1983 and 6542 in 1984; however only half of the skins in 1983 were imported directly from the USA, and 2000 of them reportedly came from Paraguay, where the species does not occur. DISCUSSION There is a variety of factors which preclude a valuable global comparison between CITES and Customs data. The major factors are: - that the collection of data for the two sources is carried out in different ways; - that Customs data, and some CITES data, do not refer to particular species; - that very few countries even have a category for crocodilian skins in their Customs data, and neither of the two major importing countries (France and Italy) has such a category; - that the Customs data that do exist for crocodilian skins are generally split into raw and processed skins whereas CITES data are not so divided; j - that Customs statistics are generally reported in kilogrammes while CITES data mostly record numbers of skins; - and that the quality of the Customs data and CITES annual report statistics is variable and the latter are particularly poor for the earlier years of CITES implementation, although they have improved slightly in successive years. We have not, therefore, undertaken a comprehensive comparison of the data from the two sources. The best data, and those that are intended to be of the greatest use for analysis of species trade, are the CITES annual report statistics. We have used these as a basis for consideration of the trade from each region of origin. In certain cases, however, it is possible to make a general comparison between these data and those in the Customs reports. It appears that the country for which this can most usefully be done is Japan. 24 World Trade Major Sources Africa The bulk of the skins originating in Africa are undoubtedly of Crocodylus niloticus, although, in some years, notably 1980, large quantities of C. cataphractus were reported to have been exported. According to the CITES statistics the net world trade in skins of these two species increased from 33 350 in 1980 to 36 598 in 1983, but then fell sharply to 8145 in 1984. The initial apparent increase is likely to some extent to have been due to improved reporting and to the growing number of Parties to CITES producing annual reports, while the decline in 1984 seems to have been due to the withdrawal of the European reservations and so probably represents a true fall in the level of trade. However, it must be stressed that the reported quantities represent only a minimum volume of trade; much of the trade is carried on between countries that are not party to CITES, such as Ivory Coast, which is known from its Customs statistics to be an exporter of crocodile skins. Until August 1985, under CITES regulations, there was only one legitimate African source of C. niloticus, that being Zimbabwe, whose population was transferred to Appendix II in 1983, and all its exports are now from ranching operations. It would appear that most of the classic crocodilian skins exported from Africa go to Europe where, up to 1984, the main destinations were France and Italy but Switzerland, the UK and F.R. Germany were also important in varying degrees. Asia and Australasia The levels of commercial crocodilian skin trade in Asia appear to have fluctuated quite considerably for each country from one year to another. Comparison of the CITES and Customs statistics is most useful for Japan and to some extent for Thailand, both of which produce Customs data on the crocodilian skin trade and are Parties to CITES. The only other country in this region to produce relevant Customs data is Singapore, a non-Party Indonesia is an important exporter of skins from C. porosus and C. novaeguineae. The extent to which its exports can be inferred from the CITES data is indicated in Tables 10 (C. novaeguineae) and 12 (C. porosus) and was discussed more fully by Luxmoore (1986). The CITES figures are likely to underestimate the trade considerably, and the best estimates are. provided by the Japanese Customs import figures. Japanese imports of raw crocodilian skins from Indonesia have risen considerably in the past three years (Table 19) - by approximately 200% since 1981 - giving a total of 72 601 kg of skins from 1981 to 1984. However, the Indonesian CITES statistics recorded no exports to Japan over this period and the Japanese CITES statistics reported only small quantities of imports of Indonesian skins in 1984. C. novaeguineae and C. porosus are also the two main species exported from Papua New Guinea. As this country has not produced Customs statistics Since 1981 nor CITES reports for 1981 or 1982, the best available data on its trade are those reported by the Department of Primary Industry in Tables 9 (C. novaeguineae) and 13 (C. porosus). These show that, for both species, the PNG exports have fallen by 40-50% from 1979 to 1983, to about 15 000 C. novaeguineae skins and about 3500 C. porosus skins. Data from the annual reports of CITES Parties also indicate a decline in the quantity of skins entering trade. However, this would be expected if increasing quantities of skins were going to Singapore, which is not a CITES Party, or to France, which has not reported imports. Both of these countries have been major importers in previous years (see page 15). Thailand's Customs statistics are discussed in full on pages 5/6. Its increase in imports of raw skins and decrease in the exports indicate a domestic market that is dependent on crocodile skins perhaps to supply a 25 World Trade tourist curio industry. Singapore is a significant trader in crocodilian skins but its total volume seems to have declined from 1980 to 1982. Its Customs statistics specifying crocodilian skins were extremely useful as an aid to monitoring the trade and it is unfortunate that from 1983 the data have been consolidated into categories which include skins from other animals. Many skins in the past have been reported as ‘domestic exports'. It is doubtful that there is much of a crocodile skin harvest in Singapore, but there are a number of crocodile farms producing C. porosus, while Caiman crocodilus and Crocodylus novaeguineae are also reported to be raised for meat and skins (Luxmoore et al., 1985). North America The only important source of classic crocodilian skins in this region is the USA which exports Alligator mississippiensis. US exports appear to have leapt from well under 10 000 skins in 1980, to 30 000 in 1981 declining to 20 000 in 1983. State-managed harvests are now carried on in Florida and Louisiana. Major Consumers Japan is probably the world’s biggest consumer of crocodilian skins and the growth of the Japanese market in the past four years is remarkable considering the pattern of decline amongst many other consumer countries. However, most of its imports are not of classic crocodilian skins. Although significant quantities of skins enter Japan from Asian sources, the vast majority of its imports come from South America, perhaps because it is only South American countries which can supply the volume of skins necessary to answer the Japanese demand, and because these skins are relatively cheap. The two major consumers of classic skins are France and Italy, both of which have large and long-established tanning industries. Although they have both held reservations on CITES Appendix I species in the past, as of 1 January 1984, these were no longer valid, with the entry into force of EEC Regulation 3626/82. As a result, dramatic changes in the patterns of trade in Appendix I species appear to have taken place. However, the transfer to Appendix II of nine countries’ populations of C. niloticus and of C. porosus in Indonesia, from 1985, is likely to restore some of the trade which has been lost to the industries in France and Italy. REFERENCES Abercrombie, C.L., Hope, C.A., Holmes, J.M., Scott, D., and Lane, J.E. (1982). Investigations into the status of Morelet's Crocodile (Crocodylus_moreletii) in Belize 1980. In, Dietz, D. and King, F.W. (Eds. ) Crocodiles. Proceedings of the Sth Working Meeting of the IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland. Pp 11-30. 0: Bhagwati, J.N. (Ed.) (1974). Illegal Transactions in International Trade. North Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam. 208 pp. Fuchs, K.H.P. (1975) The chemistry and technology of novelty leathers. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy. 201 pp. Groombridge (1982). The IUCN Amphibia-Reptilia red data book. Part 1. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. 426 pp. Groombridge, 8B. (1983). World Checklist of Threatened Amphibians and Reptiles. Nature Conservancy Council, London. 65 pp. 26 World Trade Hemley, G. and Caldwell, J. (1986). The crocodile skin trade since 1979. Crocodiles. Proceedings of the 7th Working Meeting of the IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group, Caracas, Venezuela, 1984. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland. Pp 398-412. Joanen, T. and McNease, L. (1982). Management of the Alligator as a renewable resource in Louisiana. In, Dietz, D. and King, F.W. (Eds.) Crocodiles. Proceedings of the 5th Working Meeting of the IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland. Pp 298-314. King, F.W. and Brazaitis, P. (1971). Species identification of commercial crocodilian skins. Zoologica, 56(2): 15-70. Luxmoore, R. (1986). Exploitation of the Saltwater Crocodile in Indonesia. Traffic Bulletin, 7(5): 78-80. Luxmoore, R., Barzdo, J., Broad, S. and Jones, D. (1985). A directory of crocodilian farming operations. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources and CITES Secretariat, Gland, Switzerland. Pooley, A.C. (1982). The status of African crocodiles in 1980. In, Dietz, D. and King, F.W. (Eds.) Crocodiles. Proceedings of the Sth Working Meeting of the IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland. Pp 237-266. Whitaker, R., Sukran, P. and Hartono, C. (1985). The crocodile resource in Irian Jaya. WWF/IUCN Report 12, P. 1528 Consultancy Report. 27 World Trade Table 17. INDONESIA Customs statistics. 4101920 Crocodile and Alligator Skin and Hide EXPORTS 1981 1981 1982 1982 Destination (Pcs) (kg) (Pcs) (kg) Singapore 5009 16683 14526 15300 France - - 6 26 F.R. Germany - - 7780 1345 TOTAL 5009 16683 22312 16671 Source: Foreign Trade Statistics by Comodity and Country of Destination and Port of Export, Central Bureau of Statistics, Foreign Trade Statistics, Jakarta. Table 18. IVORY COAST Customs statistics. 41.01 80 Raw Crocodile Skins EXPORTS 1977 1978 1979 1980 (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) Divers N.D.A. 214 728 322 279 Source: République de Céte D'Ivoire, Ministére de L'Economie et Finances, Direction Générale des Douanes, Service des Statistiques Douaniéres, Statistiques du Commerce Extérieur de la Céte d'Ivoire 28 World Trade Table 19. JAPAN Customs statistics. 41.01 271 Alligator and Crocodile Skins IMPORTS 1977, 1978 += 1979-1980 = 1981-1982 1983 1984 Source (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) Australia - 715 - - - - - = Belgium - - 944 - = = us ES Bolivia 1600 = = = - S = = Colombia 8996 16231 17409 16778 7992 6290 6111 6230 French Guiana - 4472 5832 - - - - - Guyana 230 879 - - - - - - Indonesia 9373 5731 9543 7476 9554 15222 19348 28477 Kenya 132 - - - - - - - Malaya 260 - - - 1375 1000 - - Neth. Antilles 5806 4975 15785 1080 - - - - Nigeria - 734 - - - - - - Pakistan - - - 64 - - - = Panama 11136 4086 ~ 856 - - - = Papua N Guinea 5839 9635 16311 17862 20310 14274 21827 17816 Paraguay 25544 42259 52343 35546 49558 138576 158676 117456 Peru - 1445 - - - - - - Philippines 353 264 1479 -215 110 55 193 54 Sabah - - - 382 621 100 - 960 Solomon Is. 181 - - - 72 772 871 544 Singapore 6782 2475 4244 6552 3434 424 91 2470 South Africa - 170 - - - - 380 - Suriname - 1606 29870 - - - - - Switzerland - - 496 - - - - - Taiwan - - - - - - - 330 Thailand - 4576 6035 4008 2885 1299 - 5642 Venezuela 98 2224 - - - - - - M M Car * - 377 247 119 - - = = USA - - 1255 256 9035 25519 26036 21009 Zimbabwe - - - - 470 - - 128 TOTAL 76330 102854 161793 91194 105416 203531 233533 201116 * Marshall, Mariana and Caroline Islands 29 World Trade Table 19: JAPAN, cont. 41.05 210 Alligator and Crocodile Leather IMPORTS 1977, 1978 += 1979 s«1980 «1981-1982 1983 1984 Source (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) Argentina - 188 168 - - - = = Bolivia 1100 1266 2693 3222 2888 1631 975 1006 Brazil - 222 - - - - - - Colombia 2301 1543 290 - - 145 6 186 F.R.Germany - - - 230 - - - - France 1001 926 520 420 256 179 869 752 Honduras - - - - - - - 2021 Hong Kong 109 694 - - - - 49 - Indonesia - - - - - 105 - 311 Italy 238 6 48 47 - 406 231 43 Mexico 59 - - 50 - - - - Neth. Antilles 245 = = = - ee = = Panama 1338 454 2661 92 - - - - Papua N Guinea - - - - - 50 - = Paraguay 6687 6682 13972 7349 9989 2034 521 2550 Singapore 165 110 97 86 46 14 17 210 Spain - - - 66 ~ - - = South Africa 70 - - - = = & = Sudan - - 60 - - = = = UK 13 70 - 12 - - = = USA - - 1 - - 272 311 62 TOTAL 12126 12161 20510 11574 13179 4836 2979 7141 Source: Japan Tariff Association, Tokyo, Japan. 30 Table 20. 41.01 00 03 Skins, Raw of Crocodile EXPORTS 1976 (kg) Destination France - Japan 560 South Africa 400 Switzerland - Zimbabwe 430 TOTAL 1390 Source: Annual Statement of External Box 333, Zamba. MALAWI Customs statistics. = wo ~N ~N ~n toe o9 Trade. a\P aw |o o iN ~ |e 1673 National World Trade 1322 Statistical Office P.O. 31 World Trade Table 21. PAPUA NEW GUINEA Customs statistics. Crocodile Skins EXPORTS 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 Destination (K'000) (K'000) (K'000) (K) (K) F.R. Germany 15 - - - - France 245 454 702 428876 566248 Indonesia - - - 140 - Italy 6 - - - - Japan 213 329 477 821321 583442 Singapore 316 441 430 369708 170550 UK - 7 2 - - USA 19 = - — - TOTAL 814 1231 1610 1620045 1320241 K'000 = Kina x 1000. NB Figures indicate value; units of reporting changed from K'000 to Kina in 1980. Source: National Statistical Office. P.O. Wards Strip, Papua New Guinea. 32 World Trade Table 22. SINGAPORE Customs statistics. 211901 (41.01.510) and 2119921 (41.01 610) Crocodile Skins Undressed a i gt Bake fae 1 Sree Aree IMPORTS 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 Origin (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) Afghanistan - 110 - - - - Australia - 1150 - - - - Colombia 7692 12692 15270 29961 21299 17365 F.R. Germany - - - 190 - - Hong Kong 64 - - - - 450 Japan 197 1847 3278 2620 1898 - Malaysia Pen. 1800 481 1571 - 437 - Neth. Antilles - - - 655 - - Panama - - - 1571 - - Papua New Guinea 15524 17385 13169 13773 8527 3736 Paraguay - - 560 998 - 3509 Philippines - 350 600 - - 469 * Sabah 1166 1981 3724 1953 2494 1365 Sarawak 1031 623 335 - - - Sri Lanka - 242 - 422 - - Thailand 158 - - - - - Uruguay - - - - - 1308 USA - - 506 - 2005 - Venezuela - - 3577 - - - occ & S Amer. 390 449 - - - - OC Oceania - 10 54 - - - Other Countries - - - 2180 332 682 TOTAL 28022 37520 42644 54323 36991 28884 211901 (41.01.510) and 2119921 (41.01 610) Crocodile Skins Undressed TOTAL EXPORTS (includes Domestic Exports) 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 Destination (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) Australia - - 100 - = - France 67353 50037 36065 69132 47256 23204 F.R. Germany 1020 - - - - - Hong Kong 93 18 50 - - - Italy 1055 - - - - - Japan 18453 13718 20899 16193 24125 18613 Mexico - - - - 1125 - New Zealand - - 4 - - - Spain - - - - - 340 Switzerland - - - 1060 - - Thailand 108 - 663 5587 2247 1708 UK 283 - - - - - USA - - 4 - - 200 TOTAL 88364 63773 57785 92085 74760 44090 33 World Trade Table 22: SINGAPORE, cont. 211901 (41.01.510) and 2119921 (41.01 610) Crocodile Skins Undressed DOMESTIC EXPORTS (included in Total Exports) 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 Destination (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) kg) (kg) Australia - - 100 - - - France 3970 480 - - - - F.R. Germany 150 - = = = = Hong Kong 838 18 50 - - - Japan 589 - 901 1525 1684 582 New Zealand - - 4 - - - Thailand 108 - 663 5587 2247 1708 USA - - 4 = = = TOTAL 4905 498 1722 7112 3934 2315 1a Bi AE a A Dye Te PL Be EI 6116911 (41.05 110) Crocodile and Alligator Skin Leather Undressed. 1979 1980 1981 1982 (kg) (kg) (kg (kg) IMPORTS Origin Colombia 1155 2110 290 255 Hong Kong - - - 90 Japan 255 350 - - Nigeria 54 - = = Paraguay 435 - - a Sri Lanka - - = 1000 occ & S Amer 9 - = = Other Countries - - = 681 TOTAL 1908 2460 290 2026 TOTAL EXPORTS Austria - o 92 3 Thailand 90 - = 2 USA 48 - - aS TOTAL 138 11 242 (sic) 450 DOMESTIC EXPORTS (included in Total Exports) Austria - = 92 ul Thailand 90 - = = TOTAL 90 11 242 450 34 Table 22: SINGAPORE, cont. World Trade 6116912 (41.05 120) Crocodile and Alligator Skin Leather Dressed 1979 1980 1981 1982 (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) IMPORTS Origin Colombia 747 1002 = = France 158 - 47 232 F.R. Germany 107 - S = Hong Kong - - 172 2 Italy 1029 = = 4 Japan 1192 87 - 564 Nigeria 38 - = = Panama 320 = = = Paraguay 1126 - = = Sri Lanka = = = = Thailand 279 = = 2 USA - 309 100 - occ & S Amer 183 - = & Other Countries - 383 = = TOTAL 5179 1780 491 (sic) 812 (sic) 6116912 Crocodile and Alligator Skin Leather Dressed 1979 1980 1981 1982 (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) TOTAL EXPORTS (includes Domestic Exports) Destination Hong Kong 732 120 299 - Japan 347 - 63 : - Spain 142 - - - Taiwan 28 - 112 - Thailand 663 - - - TOTAL 1911 365 493 26 ao DOMESTIC EXPORTS (included in Total Exports) Hong Kong 338 120 299 - Japan 52 - 63 - Taiwan 28 - 112 - Thailand 663 - 3 i TOTAL 1080 365 493 7 SS eee Source: Singapore Trade Statistics Imports and Exports. Department of Statistics, Singapore. 35 World Trade Table 23. SOMALIA Customs statistics. 211 92 Crocodile Skins EXPORTS 1977 1978 Destination (kg) (kg) Italy 10 100 TOTAL 10 100 36 World Trade Table 24. SUDAN Customs statistics. 2119040 Crocodile Skins, Salted EXPORTS 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981* 1982 Destination (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) A.R. Egypt - - - - - 400 France 14003 13783 5000 - - 1000 Switzerland 19014 18649 11150 - - = UK = - = - - 6950 TOTAL 33017 32432 16150 - - 8350 2119050 Crocodile Skins, Air-dried EXPORTS 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981* 1982 Destination (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) France - 2150 1845 3145 - 10965 Saudi Arabia - - - - - 23940 Switzerland - 3500 1100 - - = TOTAL - 5650 2945 3145 = 34905 2119060 Crocodile Skins, Pickled EXPORTS 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981* 1982 Destination (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) France - - - - - 1300 TOTAL - - - - - 1300 OO. nee * No data available for 1981 Source: The Democratic Republic of the Sudan. Foreign Trade Statistics, Ministry of Finance and.E¢onomic Planning, Department of Statistics. 37 World Trade Table 25. 41.01 12 Raw Crocodile Skins THAILAND Customs statistics. IMPORTS 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) (kg) Origin Singapore - - - 1975 817 2422 3956 USA - = = = 540 = mS TOTAL n/1 n/1 n/l 1975 1357 2422 3956 EXPORTS Destination France 12780 4140 - - 2427 - - F.R.Germany 17 - - - - = = Japan - 4104 5365 4463 2885 1265 - Singapore 198 - - - - - - Taiwan 360 - - - - - - USA 264 - - - 5 - = TOTAL 13619 8244 5365 4463 5317 1265 n/1 41.05 12 Crocodile Leather Tawed, Dyed, Designed IMPORTS Origin Italy - - 15 103 - - - Singapore 2031 1003 994 1067 205 62 45 South Africa - - 285 78 - - = USA - - 65 = = = = TOTAL 2031 1003 1359 1248 205 62 45 EXPORTS - no export data. 41.05 22 Crocodile Leather not Tawed, Dyed, Designed IMPORTS Origin Colombia - - 87 Panama - - 70 Singapore 418 149 14 TOTAL 418 149 171 n/1 n/1 n/1 n/1 EXPORTS Destination Italy - - = = = ¥ 97 Malaysia - 20 - = = = = TOTAL n/1 20 n/1l n/1 n/1 n/1 97 n/1l = not listed Source: Foreign Statistics of Thailand, Department of Customs, Bangkok. 38 World Trade Table 26. Minimum gross and net trade volume of C. acutus skins. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS 1977 France 326 924 - 598 F.R.Germany 351 326 25 - Switzerland 573 Bes 573 pS TOTAL = 1250 = 598 1978 Austria 657 - 657 - Denmark 15 - 15 - France 499 215 284 - F.R. Germany 939 - 939 - Italy - 1748 = 1748 Panama - 342 o 342 Papua New Guinea - 5 - 5 Switzerland 250 - 250 - Asia - 50 - 50 TOTAL - 2360 - 2145 1979 Austria 157 - 157 — France - 886 - 886 F.R.Germany 2335 - 2335 - Italy - 2502 - 2502 - - 323 cm - 323 cm Panama - 200 - 200 Switzerland 896 - 896 - - 323 cm - 323 cm - Venezuela 200 = 200 - TOTAL 3588 3588 1980 Austria 78 - 78 = Belgium 27 - 27 - Denmark 1561 - 1561 - F.R.Germany 963 94 869 - France 2298 - 2298 - Honduras - 2 - 2 Italy 32279 7572 24707 = Japan 152 - 152 - Paraguay - 29210 - 29210 Spain 79 3073 - 2994 Switzerland 2513 1 2512 = USA 2 = 2 est TOTAL 39952 32206 39 World Trade Table 26: C. acutus, cont. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS eo SS 1981 Austria 11 - 11 - Belgium 8 - 8 - France 62 - 62 = F.R.Germany 1052 289 763 = Italy 7590 3599 3991 - Mexico - 1 - 1 Panama - 2812 - 2812 Paraguay - 2991 - 2991 Switzerland 2467 1500 967 - USA 2 - 2 - TOTAL 11192 5804 1982 Austria 5 - 5 - Canada 1 - 1 - France - 110 - 110 Italy - 309 - 309 Mexico - 1 - 1 Switzerland 414 - 414 2 UK - 1 - 309 USA 1 - 1 - TOTAL 421 421 1983 Belgium 78 - 78 - Canada - 1 = 1 France - 216 - 216 F.R.Germany 60 = 60 Italy - 373 - 373 Mexico - 1 = 1 Switzerland 451 - 451 = UK 8 = 8 = USA 2 - 2 = Unknown - _8 uke 8) TOTAL 599 599 1984 Switzerland 105 - 105 = Italy 105 - 105 = Mexico = 1 2 1 USA 1 a 1 » TOTAL 106 106 106 ' 106 Source: CITES annual reports. NB: Totals reflect only trade reported by number of skins. 40 World Trade Table 27. Minimum gross and net trade volume of C. cataphractus skins. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS 1979 France 1159 cm 3736 1159 cm 3736 Italy 3736 1159 cm 3736 1159 cm TOTAL 3736 3736 1980 Congo - 1536 - 1536 France - 9197 - 9197 Gabon - 523 - 523 Italy 11256 50 11206 Japan 50 - 50 = TOTAL 11306 11256 1981 Denmark 208 - 208 France 10 8150 - 8140 Italy 8198 218 7980 Mexico 4 - 4 Switzerland - 52 - _ 52 TOTAL 8420 8192 1982 France 39 9065 - 9026 F.R.Germany 39 39 Gabon - 1 - 1 Italy 8936 - 8936 Spain 90 - 90 Switzerland 1 pei 1 ) TOTAL 9105 9027 1983 Austria 33 - 33 Congo - 4870 - 4870 France 4967 7679 - 2712 F.R.Germany - 33 = 33 Italy 7679 ee 1 7382 Aa TOTAL 12679 7615 1984 Congo - 2030 = 2030 France 2030 - 2030 2030 TOTAL 2030. 2030 Source: CITES annual reports. NB: Totals reflect only trade reported by number of skins. 41 World Trade Table 28. Minimum gross and net trade volume of C. niloticus skins. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS ee a ee ee 8588 8 8 1977 Canada 8 - 8 France 15 1262 - 1247 Kenya - 6 - 6 Madagascar - 1 - 1 Switzerland 1262 12 1250 UK - 2 - 2 Zambia - 2 - B25 0 TOTAL 1285 1258 1978 Botswana - 1 - 1 France 174 - 174 Spain 1 - 1 Switzerland - 174 - 174 TOTAL 175 175 1979 Botswana - 1158 - 1158 France 4450 1931 2519 F.R.Germany 1161 - 1161 Italy 1931 4457 - 2526 Madagascar - 1 - 1 Mexico 1 - 1 Nigeria - 1 - 1 South Africa 2 3 - 1 Swaziland - 1 - 1 Switzerland 1 - 1 UK 24 - 24 USA 2 16 - 14 Zambia - 4 - a8) TOTAL 7572 3706 1980 Austria 85 - 85 Bermuda 13 = 18 Brazil 1 - 1 Cameroon 20 - 20 Canada 46 - 46 Colombia 1 - 1 Denmark 5 - 5 Finland 11 = 11 France 863 11608 ~ 10745 F.R.Germany 34 6 28 Hong Kong 258 = 258 Italy 21450 950 20500 42 World Trade Table 28: C. niloticus, cont. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS 1980 cont. Japan 395 a 395 Netherlands 66 = 66 Senegal 8 - 8 Somalia - 1266 = 1266 South Africa - 2 me 2 Spain 404 - 404 Sudan - 3635 = 3635 Switzerland 101 4975 = 4874 Thailand 6 - 6 Togo 11 - 11 : UK 68 1637 - 1569 USA 14 - 14 Unknown 217 - 217 Zimbabwe = 3 = 3 TOTAL 24082 22094 1981 Botswana - 3 - 3 Canada 1 - 1 France 3586 10390 - 6804 1396 cm2 ~ 1396 cm? F.R.Germany 342 - 342 Hong Kong 92 - 92 Italy 24451 3766 20685 = 1396 cm2 = 1396 cm2 Japan 353 - 353 Kenya - 1 - 1 Liberia - 230 - 230 Madagascar - 4 - 4 Nigeria - 10304 - 10304 Singapore 701 - 701 Somalia - : 847 - 847 South Africa 1 403 - 402 Spain 76 ; - 76 Sweden 1 - 1 Switzerland 396 3573 - 3177 Tanzania - 3 - 3 UK 1 187 - 186 USA 2 - 2 Zambia - 2 - 2 Zimbabwe - _290 = 296 TOTAL 30003 22253 43 World Trade Table 28: C. niloticus, cont. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS 1982 Australia 2 - 2 Austria 286 1 285 Botswana 2 - 2 Canada 2 - 2 Egypt - 2 - 2 France 5044 21874 - 16830 20304 cm@ : 20304 cm2 F.R.Germany 1254 149 1105 Italy 19497 1811 17686 - 20543 cm - 20543 cm Liberia - 418 - 418 Madagascar - 20 - 20 Reunion 2 - 2 Singapore 992 - 992 South Africa 9 2 7 Spain 1 - 1 Switzerland 2 1 1 Tanzania - 5 - 5 Togo - 2817 - 2817 UK 2 - 2 239 cm2 - 239 cm2 USA 3 - 3 Unknown 13 - 13 Zimbabwe 2 - 7 TOTAL 27111 20101 1983 Australia 49 - 49 Austria 481 - 481 Belgium 93 - 93 Botswana - 3 - 3 Denmark 1 - 1 France 22677 5596 17081 53 m - 53 m F.R.Germany 937 67 870 Hong Kong 1 - 1 Italy 10412 162 10250 - 53 m - 53 m Japan 10 - 10 Liberia - 521 - 521 Madagascar - 32 - 32 Malawi - 341 - 341 Mali - 804 = 804 Nigeria - 9 - 9 Singapore 10 150 - 140 Somalia - 1 - 1 South Africa 60 - 60 Spain 30 7998 - 7968 Sudan - 15422 - 15422 Sweden 1 - 1 44 World Trade Table 28: C. niloticus, cont. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS 1983 cont. Switzerland 8 - 8 Tanzania - 15 - 15 Togo - 3560 - 3560 UK 27 - 27 USA 11 - 11 Zambia = 167 = 167 Zimbabwe 71 31 40 = TOTAL 34879 28983 1984 Australia 3 = 3 Austria 57 - 57 Belgium 159 - 159 Canada 85 - 85 74 cm - 74 cm Chad 469 - 469 Ethiopia - 1 - 1 France 3926 293 3633 Germany, FR 15 - 15 Hong Kong 371 - 371 Israel 1 - 1 Italy 2 396 - 394 Japan 115 - 115 Lebanon 9 - 9 Liberia - 320 - 320 Madagascar - 5 - 5 Malawi - 415 - 415 Mexico 3 - 3 Netherlands 2 - 2 Nigeria - 1 - er! Reunion 1 - 1 South Africa 375 32 343 Spain 5 859 - 854 Switzerland 257 1 256 Syria 51 - 51 Tanzania - 7 - 7 UK 101 32 69 - 74 cm - 74 cm USA 134 - 134 Zambia - 688 - 688 Zimbabwe 27 3457 - 3430 Country unknown 416 3 413 TOTAL 6510 6115 Source: CITES annual reports. NB: Totals reflect only trade reported by number of skins. 45 World Trade Table 29. Minimum gross and net trade volume of C. novaeguineae skins. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS 1977 Australia 1 - 1 Austria 154 - 154 France 6989 9805 - 2816 F.R.Germany 4049 186 3863 Italy 52 - 52 Japan 7041 - 7041 Mexico 12 - 12 Papua New Guinea - 14436 - 14436 Switzerland 5686 467 5219 UK 478 - 478 USA 438 6 432 - TOTAL 24900 17252 1978 Australia 2 - 2 Denmark 67 - 67 Fiji 1 - 1 France 13798 25077 - 11279 F.R.Germany 703 210 493 Hong Kong 100 50 50 Italy 2660 - 2660 Japan 6342 - 6342 Mexico 91 - 91 Papua New Guinea - 33586 - 33586 Singapore 13661 - 13661 Spain 6 - 6 Switzerland 21414 41 21373 UK 207 15 192 USA 127 200 - 73 TOTAL 59179 44938 1979 Australia 1 - 1 Austria 25 - 25 Denmark 14 - 14 France 16975 10626 6349 F.R.Germany 2247 53 2194 Hong Kong 150 - 150 Indonesia 1 - 1 Italy 2628 9 2619 Japan 13078 - 13078 New Zealand 2 - 2 Papua New Guinea - 41160 - 41160 Singapore 11115 150 10965 Switzerland 5138 - 5138 UK 93 979 - 886 USA 1600 90 1510 = TOTAL 53067 42046 46 World Trade Table 29: C. novaeguineae, cont. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS 1980 Austria 383 - 383 Belgium 37 - 37 Canada 1332 - 1332 Denmark 63 - 63 France 776 21414 - 20638 F.R.Germany 1701 117 1584 Greece 37 pairs - 37 pairs Hong Kong 281 2 279 Israel 11 - 11 Italy 5479 326 5153 Japan 5098 - 5098 1837 inches - 1837 inches Kuwait 11 - 11 Lebanon 367 - 367 Madagascar - 6 - 6 New Zealand 84 - 84 Papua New Guinea - 2928 - 2928 Singapore - 1265 - 1265 - 1837 inches - 1837 inches South Africa 12 - 12 South Korea 10 - 10 Spain 88 - 88 Switzerland 5745 1052 4693 Thailand - 28 = 28 UK 39 2710 - 2671 USA 8341 10 8331 - 37 pairs - 37 pairs TOTAL 29858 29536 1981 Australia 2 - 2 France 170 31192 - 31022 F.R.Germany 489 203 286 = 211 kg - 211 kg Hong Kong 262 - 262 Italy 12277 123 12154 211 kg - 211 kg = 414 cm2 x 414 cm2 Japan. 493 - 493 Mexico 3 2 1 Papua New Guinea - 2 - 2 Singapore - 262 - 262 Switzerland 4767 104 4663 UK - 50 - 50 USA 13428 3 13425 414 cm? = 414 cm? - TOTAL 31941 31336 47 World Trade Table 29: C. novaeguineae, cont. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS 1982 Australia 2 - 2 Austria 66 - 66 France 6 13392 - 13386 F.R.Germany 86 - 86 Hong Kong 34 - 34 Indonesia - 905 = 905 Italy 5134 32 5102 Japan 1681 1 1680 Papua New Guinea - 2 - 2 Singapore 905 31 874 Switzerland 4088 - 4088 UK 4 1 3 USA 2364 6 2358 = TOTAL 14370 14293 1983 Australia 21 - 21 Austria 210 - 210 Bahamas 2 - 2 Belgium 24 - 24 German Dem. Rep. 28 - 28 F.R. Germany 958 18 940 France 4924 8928 - 4004 - 201 kg - 201 kg Greece 3 - 3 Hong Kong 2013 3 2010 Indonesia - 1980 - 1980 Iceland 110 - 110 Italy 5157 437 4720 1 kg - 1 kg = 172 £t2 = 172 £t? Japan 16030 115 15915 79882 inches - 79882 inches 1529 kg - 1529 kg Japan - 10 m - 10 m Korea 10 m - 10 m Lebanon 12 - 12 Mexico 6 lbs - 6 lbs Papua New Guinea - 17014 - 17014 - 79882 inches - 79882 inches - 1529 kg - 1529 kg Saudi Arabia - 82 - 82 Singapore 2061 5901 - 3840 Sweden 10 - 10 Switzerland 2289 - 2289 172 £t2 = 172 £t2 United Arab Emirates 12 - 12 UK 54 541 - 487 USA 938 1 937 200 kg - 200 kg - 6 ibs - 6 lbs TOTAL 34938 27325 48 World Trade Table 29: C. novaeguineae, cont. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS _<————— SS SSS SSS ss SS SS ES ee eee ee eee eee 1984 Austria 107 - 107 France 12164 3301 8863 Germany, FR 1 55 - 54 Hong Kong 169 - 169 2752 cm ~ 2752 cm Indonesia - 225 - 225 Italy 654 1436 - 782 Japan 16964 536 16428 313 kg 7559 cm 313 kg 7339 cm Papua New Guinea 39 cm 21321 39 cm 21321 Singapore 225 6999 - 6774 4536 cm 313 kg 4536 cm 313 kg Spain 3 - 3 Switzerland 3112 658 2454 73 cm - 73 cm Taiwan 4 - 4 USA 1136 8 1128 159 cm - 159 cm ‘TOTAL 34539 29156 Source: CITES annual reports. NB: Totals only reflect trade reported by number of skins. 49 World Trade Table 30. Minimum gross and net trade volume of Crocodylus porosus skins. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS 1977 Australia 1 - 1 France 1098 6871 - 5773 F.R.Germany 6517 7 6510 Italy 706 2775 - 2069 Japan 1296 - 1296 Papua New Guinea - 6089 - 6089 Singapore 3236 367 2869 Switzerland 2667 - 2667 UK 113 - 113 USA 475 = 475 - TOTAL 16109 13931 1978 Australia ; 6 - 6 Austria 137 - 137 Denmark 4 - 4 France 3792 3745 47 F.R.Germany 3522 100 3422 Indonesia - 391 - 391 Italy 1370 2867 - 1497 Japan 1459 - 1459 Madagascar = 534 = 534 Papua New Guinea - 9119 - 9119 Singapore 3935 318 3617 Switzerland 2146 - 2146 UK 694 - 694 USA 9 eS 9 = TOTAL 17074 11541 1979 Australia 2 - 2 Austria 6 - 6 Canada 5 - 5 Denmark 17 - 17 France 3142 4905 - 1763 F.R.Germany 1440 1 1439 Hong Kong 1371 - 1371 Indonesia 1 - 1 Italy 1991 1314 677 Japan 1810 - 1810 New Zealand 1 - 1 Papua New Guinea - 7425 - 7425 Singapore 2454 1370 1084 Switzerland 2753 - 2753 UK 44 22 22 : 2 TOTAL 15037 9188 50 World Trade Table 30: C. porosus, cont. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS 1980 Australia - 35 - 35 Austria 17 - 17 France 10 3360 = 3350 F.R.Germany 248 - 248 Hong Kong 35 - 35 400 inches - 400 inches Italy 1138 248 890 Japan 73 - 73 Papua New Guinea - 1 - 1 Singapore 10 3 7 400 inches = 400 inches South Korea 9 - 9 Spain 20 - 20 Switzerland 2003 - 2003 UK 124 35 89 USA 4 9 = a5} TOTAL 3691 3391 1981 Austria 181 - 181 France 283 4614 - 4331 66 kg - 66 kg F.R.Germany 1132 - 1132 Hong Kong 738 - 738 Indonesia - 200 - 200 Italy 3457 1116 2341 66 kg - 66 kg Malaysia 246 186 60 Papua New Guinea 1 - 1 Singapore 200 743 - 543 Switzerland 830 279 551 UK 130 - 130 USA 4 4 Unknown 186 246 - 60 TOTAL 7388 5134 1982 Austria 155 - 155 France - 2017 - 2017 F.R.Germany 501 - 501 Indonesia - 100 - 100 Italy 544 121 423 Japan 109 - 109 Singapore 100 - 100 Switzerland 772 - 772 UK 66 9 57 ere TOTAL 2247 2117 51 World Trade Table 30: C. porosus, cont. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS 1983 Australia 33 - 33 Austria 287 - 287 Canada 1 - 1 F.R. Germany 501 11 490 France 1750 3346 - 1596 Indonesia - 300 - 300 Italy 398 9 389 Japan 2050 - 2050 Korea 25 - 25 Malaysia - 56 - 56 Mexico 9 lbs - 9 lbs Papua New Guinea - 3446 - 3446 Singapore 371 = 371 Switzerland 1717 - 1717 Turkey 1 - 1 UK 35 1 34 USA - 9 lbs - 9 TOTAL 7169 5398 1984 Austria 240 - 240 Canada - 3 - 3 France 2687 1295 1392 1437 cm - 1437 cm Germany, FR 31 3 28 Hong Kong 1 - 1 Indonesia - 200 - 200 Italy - 93 - 98 Japan 2648 180 2468 1510 cm - 1510 cm Papua New Guinea 70 5152 - 5082 Singapore 200 - 200 Switzerland 1044 - 1044 73 cm - 73 cm USA 10 - 10 TOTAL 6931 5358 Source: CITES annual reports. NB: Totals reflect only trade 52 reported by number of skins. lbs World Trade Table 31. Minimum gross and net trade volume of Alligator mississippiensis skins. COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS EXPORTS 1980 France 8990 4093 4897 = 57 m = 57 m UK 4 = USA 4093 8994 - 4901 57 m 208 57 m = TOTAL 13087 4901 1981 France 18180 9407 8773 F.R.Germany 5 - 5 Hong Kong 38 = 38 25 lbs - 25 lbs Italy 9005 5021 3984 Japan 1984 - 1984 Mexico 8 - 8 UK 1220 9407 8773 8000 £t2 a 8000 £t2 USA 13505 29298 - 15793 = g000 £t2 = 8000 Ft? TOTAL 43945 15793 1982 Austria 76 - 76 - 5 lbs - 5 lbs Canada 2 - 2 France 14156 9292 4864 F.R.Germany 702 70 632 Hong Kong 54 - 54 65 kg = 65 kg Italy 9624 4147 5477 Japan } 5355 15 5340 4582 ft - 4582 ft New Zealand 1 a 1 Switzerland 309 - 309 UK 266 - 266 USA 8814 25835 - 17021 - 4582 ft - 4582 ft - 65 kg - 65 kg 5 lbs - 5 lbs - TOTAL 39359 17021 53 World Trade Table 31: A. mississippiensis, cont. NET EXPORTS 1573 50 20 40 12948 219 kg lbs kg COUNTRY GROSS GROSS NET IMPORTS EXPORTS IMPORTS eee 2s | ty tee oo EE ————_——E————eEeEeEe—E 1983 Australia 1 - 1 Austria 100 - 100 Belgium 8 - 8 Canada 23 - 23 Denmark 7 - 7 France 10736 12309 - F.R.Germany 243 41 202 Hong Kong 247 120 127 - 50 kg - Italy 9407 3765 5642 Japan 10463 132 10331 50 kg - 50 kg Mexico 10 kg - 10 kg 130 lbs - 130 lbs Netherlands - 1 - Paraguay - 2000 - Singapore - 490 - South Korea 20 - 20 Spain 27 69 - Switzerland 367 - 367 Uruguay F - 1 - UK 85 - 85 USA 7263 20069 - - 130 lbs - TOTAL 38997 1984 Austria 105 - 105 Canada 22 - 22 France 9387 6899 2488 Germany, FR 1 21 - Greece 86 pairs - 86 pairs Hong Kong 128 - 128 91 kg - 91 kg Italy 5543 3612 1931 Japan 7845 107 7738 75 kg 40 m 75 kg Mexico 48 - 48 53 kg - 53 kg Spain 104 = 104 Switzerland 484 250 234 UK 84 2 84 USA 8571 21519 = 40 m 219 kg 40 m TOTAL 32388 Source: CITES annual reports NB: Totals reflect only trade 54 reported by number of skins. 12968 Exports to Europe of Crocodylus niloticus skins from Sudan Alexandra M. Dixon and Richard Luxmoore Wildlife Trade Monitoring Unit IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre 219c Huntingdon Road Cambridge United Kingdom 55 “yy = sy . . ; f a Ae : : : — . Z : ee as moi). 86 ia *y A rhys ie? Z baie d ~ | zt y a : - . -> : > e oe é = s == A J = y : | Kies - ‘ ; ar ; ; — > ROeEA BR eeinsse le is - : 5 g r beeio i * ® s i D Saino = a ; 5 heeiatid =~ - : ee Ry: ade | i ror i wei 20 3 iso Cea7t etriubie sina = ae — yaa ? Caan ia ‘« } vee i : -. Ty . jy See ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank Mr V. Margossian and Mr H. Margossian of Exclesior Hides and Skins, Ltd and Mr Pierre Grawitz of Gordon Choisy for their co-operation. 56 ey, _ | 0 ; : reoowarins i aetbD = Mo aaiennanan i ae tne aalehysam iat nase: ed ax! RAL, Yalod) wobaed “Yo nd eweRD. prtets a ie ID cy eles Bink .) ; we iy - a ry i: Bo. res Hl Sudan Exports INTRODUCTION This report was produced by the Wildlife Trade Monitoring Unit of IUCN's Conservation Monitoring Centre under contract to the International Alligator/Crocodile Trade Study (IACTS). The objective was to document the trade in Nile Crocodile Crocodylus niloticus skins between Europe and Sudan based on an analysis of the data supplied by the principle traders involved. The Nile Crocodile Crocodylus niloticus occurs throughout most of Africa south of the Sahara, and northwards along the Nile as far as Lake Nasser (Groombridge, 1982). The species is considered to be vulnerable, having declined owing to commercial exploitation and loss of habitat, although substantial populations remain in several countries (Pooley, 1982). No quantitative surveys have been carried out in Sudan, but the species is considered to be abundant and stable in most of the country, although marked population declines have been reported in the Upper Nile between Kosti and Amara. South of Juba, crocodiles are considered common, but declining, partially as a result of droughts (Tello, 1985). The species was listed in Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) from its inception in 1975. In 1983, the population in Zimbabwe was transferred to Appendix II, in accordance with CITES Resolution Conf. 3.15 relating to ranching Operations. In 1985, the populations in nine additional African countries were transferred to Appendix II, subject to annual export quotas; these are given in Table 1. Reservations to trade in Cc. niloticus are currently held by Botswana, Sudan, Zambia and Zimbabwe, although the delegation of Sudan announced the Sth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES in Buenos Aires in 1985 that the Sudanese Government § intended to withdraw its reservation. Reservations were also formerly held by Italy and France, but were withdrawn on 1 January 1984 and 10 December 1984, respectively, in compliance with EEC Regulation 3626/82. Table 1. Quotas of C. niloticus skins which may be exported from nine African countries where the populations have been transferred to Appendix II. eet Country Estimated population Quota of of C. niloticus animals a ei eds i zeeibe in tie) form OF: By Cameroon 5000 20 Congo 40000 1000 Kenya 40000 150 Madagascar 30000 1000 Malawi 28300 500 Mozambique 202000 1000 Sudan 250000 5000 Tanzania 74000 1000 Zambia 150000 2000 In spite of the restrictions demanded by CITES, there has. been considerable trade in C. niloticus. An analysis of CITES Annual Reports (Dixon and Barzdo, this volume) showed that the minimum net trade fluctuated between 20 000 and 30 000 from 1980 to 1983, before falling to 6120 in 1984 (Fig. 1). The majority of these skins were imported to Italy and France, under their reservations, and the withdrawal of those reservations probably accounts for the marked drop in trade in 1984. 57 Sudan Exports 100 eh 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 Figure 1. Minimum net trade in skins of Crocodylus niloticus reported to CITES. 000 skins 58 Sudan Exports Investigation of Sudan's trade in crocodile skins is important for several reasons. It has been a major source of skins and, in 1983, accounted for over half of the skins reported to CITES (Fig. 1). It was allocated the largest quota of all the African countries, and was considered to have the largest wild population of crocodiles (Table 1). There is a very high level of national utilization, and it has been estimated that 20 000 to 30 000 crocodiles are hunted annually in the country. Most of the hunting is uncontrolled and some is illegal, and the poachers are reported to be well organised and well armed, having killed several anti-poaching staff in recent years. There is also thought to be a very high rate of illegal export of crocodile skins, possibly between 30 000 and 50 000 a year, mainly to Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Some of these skins may be from indigenous crocodiles but the majority are thought to have been illegally imported to Sudan from Zaire, Congo, Nigeria, Central African Republic and Chad. These imported skins are mostly of Osteolaemus tetraspis, with lesser quantities of C. niloticus and Crocodylus cataphractus (Tello, 1985). Medicinal by-products, such as dried penes, have been featuring increasingly in the export trade. Control of imports and exports is reported to be almost impossible, facing similar problems to the control of poaching, and it is aggravated by the long land borders with eight other countries. Dealers within the country reported that they have been selling more crocodile skins in the years since Sudan ratified CITES in 1982, as the resulting restrictions on the legal trade had opened the doors for illegal trade to Egypt (Tello, 1985). Tello reported that when he suggested an export quota of 5000 skins, the Sudanese CITES Management Authority requested that it should be raised to 10 000 to allow export of the enormous number of skins which it claimed were stockpiled in the dealers’ stores. In the event, the lower quota was accepted at Buenos Aires. The trade in crocodile skins is of substantial importance to the rural economy of Sudan (Tello, 1985). This report uses three sources of data to analyse export of C. niloticus skins from Sudan to Europe. The Annual Reports of the Parties to CITES, Customs export figures from Sudan, and data supplied by European importers of skins. METHODS Annual Reports of the Parties to CITES for the years 1977 to 1984 were analysed by the methods described in Dixon and Barzdo (this volume). Customs export figures were examined in the form of the Foreign Trade Statistics, published by the Department of Statistics, Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, Democratic Republic of Sudan. These data were only available for the years 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980 and 1982. They specify exports of Crocodile skins, salted (Category 2119040), Crocodile skins, air-dried (Category 211050) and Crocodile skins, pickled (Category 2119060). Interviews were carried out with three reptile skin dealers involved with the trade in C. niloticus skins from Sudan. The companies represented were Exclesior Hides and Skins Ltd, Gordon Choisy and the Tanneries des Cuirs d'Indochinie et de Madagascar. The first two of these companies contributed data on the number and size of skins imported since 1978. CITES DATA CITES data from 1978 to 1984 are incomplete. Sudan did not effectively become a Party to CITES until 1983, and did not submit an annual report until 1985; so the trade in previous years must be inferred from the imports and re-exports reported by other Parties. This will give an under-estimation of the true volume of the trade particularly as France, one of the two main importers of Sudanese crocodile skins, did not report imports of Appendix II species before 1983. The quality of the reporting in the early years of the 59 Sudan Exports Convention (before 1980) was generally poorer, partially because there were fewer Parties. The minimum net trade in skins of C. niloticus throughout the world is shown in Fig. 1, together with the net trade in skins declared as having originated in Sudan. No skins of Sudanese origin were reported in trade in 1984 or before 1980. All the reported transactions involved either imports to or re-exports from Italy or France; these are shown in Table 2. Table 2. All trade between 1978 and 1984 reported to CITES in skins of C. niloticus declared to have been exported by, or to have originated in Sudan. Importer Exporter Quantity reported Quantity reported by Importer by exporter 1980 Italy Sudan 3635 - Italy France 3885 - 1981 F.R. Germany Italy 114 - France Italy 837 - France Italy 1396 cm2 - Italy Switzerland 3573 - Italy France 1117 2412 Italy UK 187 = 1982 France Italy 1117 - France Italy 20304 cm? - Italy France 2817 3905 Unknown Italy 13 - 1983 France Sudan 10000 - Italy Sudan 5422 - Switzerland Italy 6 - F.R. Germany Italy 26 - Spain France 27 = Italy Spain 498 - Italy France 632 599 eC rrr — — — — — — — CUSTOMS DATA The Sudanese Customs export data are given in Table 3. All quantities are given in kilogrammes, but it was not possible to convert the bulk of these to numbers of skins as there is no indication of whether they were wet- or dry-salted. . The total volume of exports reported fluctuated markedly from year to year, amounting to 137 894 kg over the whole period. The bulk of these, 53 413 kg (39%), were exported to Switzerland, with a similar quantity to 60 Sudan Exports France, 53 191 kg (39%). However, exports to Switzerland ceased after 1979 while those to France have continued at high levels. In 1982, 54% of the skins were exported to Saudi Arabia, with a substantial quantity to the UK and some to Egypt. It should be noted that the enormous illegal exports to Egypt and Saudi Arabia, discussed earlier, will not be represented in these Customs data. Table 3. Exports of crocodile skins reported by Sudanese Customs. All quantities are in kg. 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981* 1982 2119040 Crocodile Skins, Salted Country of Consignment A.R. Egypt - - - - 400 France 14003 13783 5000 - 1000 Switzerland 19014 18649 11150 - - ~ UK - - - - 6950 TOTAL 33017 32432 16150 - 8350 2119050 Crocodile Skins, Air-dried Country of Consignment France - 2150 1845 3145 i 10965 Saudi Arabia - - - - 23940 Switzerland - 3500 1100 - - TOTAL - 5650 2945 3145 34905 2119060 Crocodile Skins, Pickled Country of Consignment France - - - - 1300 TOTAL - - - - 1300 GRAND TOTAL 33017 34582 17250 3415 44555 * No data were available for 1981 Source: The Democratic Republic of the Sudan, Foreign Trade Statistics, Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning, Department of Statistics. DEALERS’ DATA Since 1978, the number of dealers known to have been involved in the trade of Sudanese Nile Crocodile skins with Europe has been small. Two suppliers in Sudan, Import and Export Promotion Ltd, and El Fakki, Provided skins for the five European buyers: Overseas Leather Company Ltd, Excelsior Hides and Leathers Ltd, both UK-based companies, Herth & Cie, Tanneries des Cuirs d'Indochine et de Madagascar (TCIM), and Gordon Choisy, all in France, 61 Sudan Exports and Italrettili in Italy. Although it must be remembered that the European dealers also trade amongst themselves and therefore the flow of skins within Europe may be somewhat convoluted, Fig. 2 shows the general trade pattern as it existed in 1980. Fig. 2. Major European dealers involved in trading in skins of Crocodylus niloticus from Sudan. SUDAN Import and Export El Fakki Promotion Ltd EUROPE Excelsior Hides and Skins Ltd Gordon Choisy (Fr.) TCIM (Fr.) (3) (Based in UK but skins shipped to Switzerland, Italy and France) (4) Herth & Cie (Fr.) (2) Italrettili (It.) (1) Notes Ve Excelsior has not suplied MItalrettili with skins since 1980. Italrettili has since been using stock-piled skins but is not known to be importing any new supplies from Sudan. Qe TCIM has not imported any skins since 1982 when the tariff was imposed (Roggwiller, pers. comm.). Bo Herth & Cie is currently in liquidation. 4. Excelsior Hides and Skins has not imported any skins since 1982. Si Overseas Leather Company Ltd stopped importing Sudanese crocodile skins around 1975 (V. Margossian, pers. comm.). In addition, the European dealers trade amongst themselves. For various reasons, largely stemming from the difficulties of obtaining skins (paperwork and limited supply) and the prohibitively high tariff imposed upon the export of crocodile skins by the Sudanese Government since 1982 (V. Margossian, pers. comm.) TCIM, Excelsior and Italrettili have not imported any Sudanese crocodile skins for at least a couple of years (V. Margossian, Roggwiller, pers. comm.). In addition, the withdrawal of reservations by Italy and France caused by ERC Regulation 3626/82 would also be expected to have reduced the volume of Nile Crocodile skins entering Europe. However, as a result of the transfer of the Sudanese population of Nile Crocodiles to Appendix II and a proposed reduction in the tariff by the Sudanese Government, both Excelsior and TCIM expressed the intenion of resuming importing in early 1986 (Margossian, Roggwiller, pers. comm.). Excelsior and Gordon Choisy have both provided data on the size and quantity of their skins obtained since 1978. These data are summarized below. As Gordon Choisy obtains its skins from El Fakki and Excelsior supplied the other companies, these data are not considered to overlap in any substantial way. Excelsior is based in the UK but imports the crocodile skins from Sudan into Italy, France, Spain and Switzerland where they are collected and then shipped on to the buyers. 62 Sudan Exports Table 4: Number and size of Crocodylus niloticus skins imported by Excelsior from Sudan. Figures in brackets are the mean skin size within each size class. Skin size (cm) 1978-79 1979-80 1980-81 1981-82 50+ 1091 (64.5) 1257 (66.9) 1964 (66.3) 605 (66.1) 40-49 1278 (41.5) 994 (42.8) 1946 (43.2) 463 (43.6) 30-39 2751 (32.5) 2089 (32.2) 3959 (33.0) 713 (33.6) 25-29 1857 (26.0) 1588 (26.0) 2729 (26.5) 465 (26.6) 20-24 1947 (21.3) 1883 (21.1) 2892 (21.5) 544 (21.9) 15-19 1150 (17.0) 918 (17.0) 1461 (16.8) 227 (16.5) 10-14 230 (12.2) 258 (12.4) 261 (12.3) 17 (13.0) Total 10304 8987 15212 3084 Source: V. Margossian 738-19 79-80 | 80-81 y elise 10 30 50 10 30 50 Figure 3. Size-frequency distribution of skins of Crocodylus niloticus imported by Exclesior. For the purposes of this figure, the "50+" size class was considered to be 50-80 cm. 63 Sudan Exports 0 81 2 83 20 40 “aie Figure 4. Size-frequency distribution of skins of Crocodylus niloticus imported by Gordon Choisy. For the Purposes of this figure, the "40+" size class was considered to be 40-70 cm. 64 Sudan Exports Table 5: Number and size of Crocodylus niloticus skins imported by Gordon Choisy from Sudan Skin size (cm) 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 40+ 1673 1116 413 1235 1092 30-39 821 676 270 912 1119 25-29 517 391 155 864 882 20-24 404 410 117 708 697 15-19 87 166 44 133 207 Total 4400 2098 3502 2759 999 3852 3997 Source: P. Grawitz Tables 4 and 5 give the annual total imports of the two firms. The size-frequency distributions of the skins imported are given in Figs 3 and 4. The sharp decline in volume recorded by Excelsior in 1981-82 was in response to the imposition of the Sudanese Government tariff (Margossian, pers. comm.). As the tariff was charged on a ‘per skin’ basis, this may account for the slight proportional increase in bigger skins imported by Excelsior in 1981-82 (see Fig. 3). The data provided by Gordon Choisy do not show a similar proportional increase in skin size but they do show a sharp drop in the number of skins imported in 1982. The minor fluctuations in the size-frequency of the skins imported by Exclesior (Fig. 3) may also be attributable to the harvesting regime. According to V. Margossian (pers. comm.), rotational and selective hunting leaves areas untouched in some years, and certain size classes may be preferentially targetted. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS In order to make comparisons between the three sets of data it is necessary to adjust the annual totals reported by Exclesior to calender years. This was approximated by averaging the totals for adjacent years, and the resulting averages were added to the totals reported by Gordon Choisy to give the dealer's totals in Table 6. The export totals to Europe alone reported by the Sudanese Customs, and the minimum net trade in Sudanese skins calculated from the CITES reports is also given in the table. It should be noted that the Customs figures are given in kg of skins while the other two sources gave numbers of skins. Different methods of reporting make it possible that the same skins reported by one source in one year may be reported in the following year by another source. All comparisons must therefore be treated with caution. There was very poor correlation between the Customs data and the CITES Reports. While the imports to France would not be expected to have been reported (because of French policy not to report Appendix II imports), the imports to Switzerland and the UK should have featured in the CITES reports unless they had merely been in transit for onward shipment to other countries. It is true that the Customs reports may include other species of crocodilian, as Tello (1985) asserted that a large percentage of the trade was in Osteolaemus tetraspis and Crocodylus cataphractus, but CITES reports contained no records of trade in either of these species originating in Sudan. 65 Sudan Exports There was a similarly poor correlation with the dealers’ data, suggesting that other dealers apart from the three consulted may have been importing substantial quantities of skins from Sudan. In particular, the Customs data indicated exports to Switzerland prior to 1980, and to France and the UK in 1982, which did not appear to be reflected in the dealers'data. CITES reports also reveal a large imports to France and Italy in 1983, when the dealers consulted reported little (or no) trade. Finally, it should be noted that whereas the export trade to Europe formerly constituted the bulk, if not all, of Sudans' exports, it appears from the Customs data that Saudi Arabia and Egypt took 55% of the reported trade in 1982. This is further corroborated by Tello's (1985) reports of substantial trade to these two countries. Table 6. Comparison of the total trade in crocodile skins between Sudan and Europe from three sources of data. See text for explanation. Source 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Dealers (skins) 9552+ 11743 16502 11907 2541 3852 3997 Customs (kg) 34582 17250 3415 20215 CITES (skins) 0 0 7520 6172 3905 15897 0 REFERENCES Dixon, A.M. and Barzdo, J. (1988). World trade in classic crocodilian skins since 1977. (This volume) Groombridge (1982). The IUCN Amphibia-Reptilia red data book. Part 1. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. 426 pp. Hemley, G. and Caldwell, J. (1986). The crocodile skin trade since 1979. Crocodiles. Proceedings of the 7th Working Meeting of the IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group, Caracas, Venezuela, 1984. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland. Pp 398-412. Pooley, A.C. (1982). The status of African crocodiles in 1980. In, Dietz, D. and King, F.W. (Eds.) Crocodiles. Proceedings of the Sth Working Meeting of the IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland. Pp 237-266. Tello, J. Lobao (1985). CITES consultancy report on Nile Crocodile Crocodylus niloticus. Annex to the "Proposal to transfer Crocodylus niloticus from Appendix I to Appendix II and to allow legal trade with set quotas", submitted to the 5th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES. 66 Japanese Imports of Crocodile and Alligator Skins 1970 -— July 1986 Alexandra M. Dixon Tom Milliken and Hideomi Tokunaga TRAFFIC( Japan) Nihon Seimei Akabanebashi Building 3-1-14 Shiba Minato-ku, Tokyo Japan With the cooperation of the All Japan Association of Reptile Skin and Leather Industries 67 ean” (ee eaten “yt mente eat sie | ica ate oa * ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to extend our appreciation to the All Japan Association of Reptile Skin and Leather Industries, especially Ever Trading Co. Ltd., Fuso Trading Co. Ltd., Hori & Co. Ltd., Horiuchi Trading Co. Ltd., Inoue & Co. Ltd., Oshiba Co., Stock Kojima International Inc., Sunward Boeki Co. Ltd., Takara Tsusho Co. Ltd., and Yamatoshi Hikaku Co. Ltd., for their cooperation with this study. We would also like to extend particular thanks to Mr Akira Saikyo, Executive Director of the Association, Mr Takehara of Horiuchi Trading Co., Mr Kataoka of Inoue & Co., Mr Sato of Stock Kojima, Mr Yamanaka of Yamatoshi Hikaku Co., and Mr Shimizu of Ever Trading, for their considerable assistance in all aspects of the study. Without their generous guidance this report would not have been possible. Finally, we are very grateful to the TRAFFIC(Japan) staff, Cecilia Song, Keiko Sato, Satoshi Watanabe, and Hiroko Kakefuda, for their invaluable logistical contribution. Thanks are also due to Jonathan Barzdo and Richard Luxmoore of the Wildlife Trade Monitoring Unit for their editorial skill and evaluation, and to Sheila Millar who was responsible for the Final typing. 68 i ois 7 Vi on. & Nolte/o ? & lit oY ' ~ oh oo ee | ay) gnibesz ie an 2 7 ? tw) Te ; oO) 2 etoal ,.2i/. a) anibo'st ers (eon , * } ,iB32 .02) df008 hagyave ., 94 “faa 60% smiiie 245691 ; siited feigeasgoeo tied) 392 Baa: :eD uteart eo b42 . co ofewet sovdiat soit aM a4 -atnwitd on tao! y ime +; 001 f- ee har oH ..@2 gaibet? Idovitel! te 4% ate’ if : tdoatameY, 44 adenemst WH. stizol ps2 ‘@onsisithe nideieblenos ated act .gritest aes to uxieit® ws 1. oy Maeget | iat wanhbitg aHoyeass: tists. *pond ¥ : O89 Yo. asoeges jgnod wELiced ;Vicdu. (asgerporvecet ety ‘ay oy ree ens ow ELRRAIa! ‘eldeuteva?. aieds ‘woo pabe jeder baal bie sdane* “ep we _boetsia base obrvsd faidacoees sub orte ose ctieily Sivgdiiynes I baa) filda, teiactiby tisha sik 4ot xi OFM oierty . F i ‘3 ¢ =) eehged: Lent) edd wii widisncgtes eew om on tt in al) i jon ,oolgae TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION METHODS OVERVIEW: JAPANESE CUSTOMS DATA 1970 TO JULY 1986 IMPORTS BY SPECIES Caiman crocodilus Crocodylus novaeguineae Crocodylus porosus Alligator mississippiensis Crocodylus siamensis Crocodylus niloticus Crocodylus cataphractus Melanosuchus niger COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN/EXPORT Latin America and the Caribbean Overview Argentina Bolivia Colombia Netherlands Antilles Panama Paraguay Peru Suriname Venezuela Other Latin America/Caribbean Countries North America Overview United States Asia and Oceania Overview Indonesia Malaysia Palau Islands Papua New Guinea Philippines Singapore Solomon Islands Thailand dl Other Asia/Oceanian Countries Africa Overview South Africa Zimbabwe Other African Countries Europe Overview France Italy Spain Other European Countries Japan Imports 69 ae oe i=) io Ni q i ¥ Rett 2 ee me ara - es a) a i ; q i ‘ on : n q aa \@Ooxen vaom tied ein alae a F : i a ‘pT oun a0 ‘ ) ROR euee ease set ood 1A oli hy; ; ‘ an pacar "> jaan “ o \ \ v » ites ie ac ny ic dt: had : ; MelvaWiO eikaed hep bt Y hy : t 7 Japan Imports VALUE OF THE TRADE IN RAW CROCODILIAN SKINS 125 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS 132 REFERENCES 134 APPENDICES Appendix 1 Japanese Customs statistics: imports of Crocodile and Alligator skins 135 Appendix 2 Dealers' survey questionnaire form 138 Appendix 3 Dealers' data: weight and number of skins compiled by species 139 Appendix 4 Dealers’ data: weight and number of skins compiled by countries 141 Appendix 5 Dealers' data: size of skins by length 145 Appendix 6 Dealers' data: size of skins by width 147 Appendix 7 Dealers' data: average weight of skins by species and countries 150 Appendix 8 CITES Annual Report data 1977 - 1984 152 Appendix 9 Skin size conversion factors 166 Appendix 10 Japanese Customs statistics: imports of Crocodile and Alligator leather 168 70 er nee : 2 7 Ss - — a ae i; ae sisagwt saQget sf Pe ’ aa ca? 2Hia0 RAL JTOOOORS WAN UY Séeat WAT tn BUAAv)) | ae Pere Oe Rea * — ae | 4 ait eer tH 4 gamete ga | na Bee: anes i tub: ‘syeSa0t F ae te diglew bgerdus iasan ' ‘aatvdnves Bow colsesu ed i es “pl ~ eset +! CRN Letom erate? nc ‘wenege) a9 ftnTsade-ammsewd suancges = O44 Tejfteqs. 205 martin boo | 7 oO: ib Japan Imports INTRODUCTION This report was produced by TRAFFIC(Japan), with the cooperation of the All Japan Association of Reptile Skin and Leather Industries, as part of the International Alligator and Crocodile Trade Study (IACTS) project. Domestically, the Japanese reptile skin industry has a fairly long history. Currently the importation and tanning of skins affords employment for approximately 300 people. In order to protect the commercial interests of this industry at the time of Japan's accession to CITES, the government found it expedient to place reservations on seven reptile species listed in Appendix I, including Crocodylus porosus. Japanese imports of crocodilian skins comprise a significant part of the total international trade. It has long been recognized that the CITES statistics give a poor indication of this trade and that more complete data are contained in Customs statistics (Hemley and Caldwell, 1986). However, Customs data only record the trade by weight and do not separate the different crocodilian species. This study introduces new data, supplied by the importers themselves, which, in addition to Customs statistics, serve to bridge the gap and allow the most comprehensive evaluation of the trade to date. The data are presented in two major sections: the first is organized by species and the second by countries. Other sections present an overview of the trade from 1970 to July 1986, examine the value of Japan's imports, and discusses future trade options in relation to current CITES controls and national trade restrictions. In the report, the definition of ‘classic’ crocodilian skins follows Fuchs (1975) to refer to ‘'non-ossified' skins which are derived from Alligator mississippiensis and all Crocodylus species. 71 Japan Imports METHODS This report is primarily based upon two sources of data. First, Japanese Customs statistics produced by the Japanese Ministry of Finance provide data on imports of crocodilian skins in two separate categories. One category, 41.01.271 “Alligator and Crocodile Skins", quantifies imports of raw skins by weight in kilograms, declared value in yen, and country of origin if declared, otherwise country of export. The other category, 41.05.221 “Alligator and Crocodile Leather", does the same for imports of tanned skins. The Customs data do not provide information on species or the number and size of skins represented in the trade. Customs statistics for imports of raw crocodilian skins from 1970 to July 1986 are given in Appendix I. Appendix 10 presents Customs data on crocodile leather imports from 1977 to 1984. The second source of data was obtained through the cooperation of the All Japan Association of Reptile Skin and Leather Industries, a trade association of 39 companies engaged in the import, tanning and marketing of reptile skins in Japan. In September 1985, a detailed questionnaire (Appendix 2) was sent to 24 companies identified as importers of crocodilian skins. The survey solicited data at the species or subspecies level for all imports between 1977 and 1984. Based upon company records compiled by the dealers themselves, these data identified countries of export, origin, or re-export and the number and weight of skins for wet-salted, dry-salted, or tanned imports. The Be 233,533 Dealers vee [_] Customs 200 ' 201,116 150 aol de t 127,708 Z r 112,192 % Z : 100 102,854 a 72,252 Y y y 76,330 “TE 105,416 j j y 50,702 ZY 55,057 Y) ZY y Z »_a_Al Zl Zl Zi Zl Al GZ te ris) 19 80 81 82 83 84 Figure 1: Comparison of dealers’ data and Customs statistics for imports of Crocodile and Alligator skins by weight (including tanned pieces). Source: Japanese Customs statistics, dealers’ data 72 Japan Imports importers were also asked for the annual minimum, maximum and average width or length of the skin pieces. Of the companies surveyed, ten replied, one of which was no longer engaged in importation during the period examined. The other nine include all but one of the major companies known to engage in large-scale importation. Some dealers reported that their records for the years 1977 to 1979 were incomplete. Accordingly, there is only an 18% correlation with the Customs figure for 1977, but the dealers’ data from 1980, the year Japan acceded to CITES, through 1984 are reasonably complete, with correlation ranging from 54.7% to 72% (Figure 1). The dealers' data are presented in Appendices 3 through 7. While overall the quality of. the data appears to be very good, two points need to be made. First, size was reported in both imperial and metric units, but generally, one system or the other characterized the measurements given for any particular species. For example, all dealers reported measurements of Alligator mississippiensis in feet and inches, whereas Melanosuchus niger measurements were always given in centimetres. When the original units were imperial, the metric equivalents have been given in brackets. All measurements in the Appendices are presented in metric units. Secondly, the analysis of weights for some species reveal certain discrepancies which largely defy logical interpretation. For example, similar sized skins show widely varying average weights, or as skins become larger, weights become smaller, or vice versa. These discrepancies probably result from data being mis-reported by the dealers, but, where dry- and wet-salted skins are concerned, it must be noted that weights would be variable anyway due to the varying amount of salt used in individual shipments. These factors, unfortunately, make it virtually impossible to derive weight conversion factors from the dealers' data to estimate the number of skins represented in the Customs data. Therefore, the weight data are given in Appendix 7, but not presented in the main text. A brief discussion of the trade in raw skins from 1970 to July 1986, based upon Customs statistics, is presented as an overview of the Japanese trade, with the statistical data given in Appendix 1. The "Imports by Species" section of this report is based upon analysis of the dealers' data, while in the “Countries of Origin/Export" section Customs statistics from the years 1977 to 1984 are analysed together with the dealers' data for the same period. Customs statistics for imports of raw crocodilian skins form the basis for the section "Values of the Trade in Raw Crocodilian Skins". Another source of data for trade in crocodilian skins, CITES Annual Report statistics, are not analysed against the other data used in this report, but are presented in Appendix 8 for reference. The fact that From the years 1980 to 1984 virtually all of Japan's imports of crocodilian skins were identified only as "Crocodylidae or Alligatoridae spp." in the Japanese CITES Annual Reports makes interpretation and correlation of those data with other sources difficult. Finally, discussions with the dealers produced a wealth of anecdotal information about the trade based upon their experiences in the business. Where appropriate, pertinent information is used to make points in the text of the report, but is noted accordingly as originating from the dealers. The dealers also outlined formulae for converting skin length to belly width and vice versa. These conversion factors are presented in Appendix 9. 73 Japan Imports AN OVERVIEW: JAPANESE CUSTOMS DATA 1970 TO JULY 1986 Japan's imports of raw crocodilian skins from 1970 to July 1986 ranged from a low of 22 644 kg in 1974 to a record high of 233 533 kg in 1983, according to Japanese Customs statistics (Figure 2). A total of 2 004 740 kg of raw skins were imported during this period, with 63% of the trade coming from Latin American or Caribbean countries, followed by 26% from Asian or Oceanian countries. Only in 1974, 1977 and 1986, were Asian imports greater (Figure 3). North America, specifically the USA, was the third major supplier of skins, but imports from there never reached 20% of the trade in any given year. Annual imports from all countries during this period are presented in Appendix 1, arranged by region and in descending order of overall trade volumes by countries. 290 Volume 200 150 100 od Oct 30 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85/7/86 year Figure 2: Total imports by weight of raw crocodilian skins Source: Japanese Customs statistics In Figure 2 three salient patterns for the period can be seen. The first trend was one of decline from 1970 to 1976; the second was a period of expansion from 1977 to April 1985; and the third, from May 1985 to the present, is characterized by a substantial reduction in import levels. The period examined in detail in this report covers the years of major growth from 1977 through 1984, the last full year of the second trend. In more specific terms, Customs statistics showed a downward trend in raw skin imports from 1970 to 1974, after which the trade remained at a low level through 1976. The pattern during this period resulted from a progressive decline in imports from Colombia, Papua New Guinea, and USA, which probably reflected the depletion of accessible crocodilian stocks or the introduction of protective legislation in those countries (Groombridge, 1982; Donadio, 1982). At the same time, the situation was exacerbated by the ‘oil shock’ of 1973, which resulted in a general economic recession in Japan lasting for the next couple of years. 74 Japan Imports 100 ---- N.AMERIC 90 —-- |.4./CAR 80 — ASIA/OCE 70 71 72 73 74 75 7677 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 7/86 Year Figure 3: % of total imports by weight originating in Latin America/Caribbean, Asia/Oceania, and North American countries Source: Japanese Customs statistics With economic recovery clearly in hand by 1977, the Japanese trade picked up and experienced remarkable growth through 1985, but with some rather dramatic fluctuations. The upward surge in 1979 reflected a stockpiling effort by the industry, stimulated by fears of imminent Japanese ratification of CITES. The significant decline in 1980, the year Japan finally acceded to the Convention, and the slight growth in 1981, were attributable to adjustments the industry made to CITES Regulations taking effect both at home and abroad and to temporary cash flow problems resulting from the 1979 stockpiling. Sky-rocketing imports in 1982 and the subsequent maintenance of record trade levels through 1985 resulted from expansion of both legitimate and illegitimate sources. Of particular note was the dramatic development of trade with Paraguay, which first emerged as a source for skins in 1977, rapidly becoming the major supplier. At the same time, other contributing factors included the resumption of stable and expanding trade with the USA and Papua New Guinea, which have generally complied with CITES requirements, and the increasing development of Indonesia, as a major source, and Thailand, as a minor scurce, of skins. In April 1985, Japan instigated new import restrictions in the wake of stern international criticism of Japan's allowance of trade from illegal sources, particularly Paraguay. As a result of attempts to comply with the new regulations, new patterns of trade have emerged. While the time span is not sufficient to make a definitive assessment, it is nonetheless evident that the industry has entered a period of re-adjustment in attempting to locate legal sources of skins. While direct trade from Paraguay has apparently ceased, stable Latin American routes have yet to be defined and it is possible that some skins are merely being re-routed. The sudden appearance of E1 75 Japan Impocts Salvador, Honduras, and Argentina as suppliers of skins needs explanation. Similarly in Asia, the sudden emergence of trade with Taiwan, historically not a supplier of skins to Japan, and a dramatic increase in imports from Malaysia needs verification. Trade from Indonesia and Singapore, always problematic, continues to exhibit unstable fluctuations which are in need of further interpretation. And finally, on a promising note, modest, but increasing trade from Africa indicates that new direct trade routes are being developed for legitimate sources of skins from that continent and trade with USA remains stable. IMPORTS BY SPECIES Eight species, including three subspecies, were identified as imported in the dealers’ data during the period examined. They are Alligator mississippiensis, Caiman crocodilus (yacare and crocodilus), Melanosuchus niger, Crocodylus cataphractus, C. niloticus, C. novaeguineae (novaeguineae), C. porosus, and C. siamensis. Although trade volumes by weight for individual species fluctuated, the overall trade pattern was one of steady growth (Figure 4). Dealers reported receiving a total of 649 815 kg of crocodilian skins and leather during the period examined. 150 | 144,883 Am. FE] -C.croco 112,191 cea M,N. : Bea C.cata 100 C.nilot (eel pecenshe T Eee C.D. 0 CS: n 450 » Ea Figure 4: Total imports by weight of crocodilian species (including tanned skin pieces) Source: Dealers’ data When trade volumes were analysed by number of skins inclusive of tanned skin pieces, imports peaked in 1979 at 316 759 skins (including over 110 000 tanned skin pieces). Thereafter, imports remained fairly stable at between approximately 200 000 to 270 000 skins annually over the next five years (Figure 5). A total of 1 724 788 skins were imported into Japan, according to the dealers’ data. 76 Japan Imports 3500 316,759 Wa 9M. 3000 Poe C.croco p 270,654 sa MN. ce 2900 aioe 247,088 we =. Cata : 225,00 fe C.nilot 2000 eee ee = eal je 7 |9), ; 1500 136,691 C.S. 0 1000 0 7 ovo) G0 Pel) 62 | 63 wae Year Figure 5: Total imports by number of skins of crocodilian species (including. tanned skin pieces) Source: Dealers’ data x The number of species comprising the annual trade varied from four to seven, but an average year involved six species. However, three to four species accounted for most of the total trade by weight and by number of skins in all years. Those species, and their percentage of the total trade by weight and number of skins respectively from 1977 to 1984 are: Caiman crocodilus (63.8% / 91.6%), Crocodylus novaeguineae (16% / 4.6%), Alligator nississippiensis (11% / 1.1%), and Crocodylus porosus (5.6% / 1.9%). However, mississippiensis only appears in the dealers’ data since 1981 and Saar 15.7% by weight and 2.0% by number of skins in trade for those years. Caiman crocodilus The taxonomy, distribution and population status of Caiman crocodilus is problematic. Between four to seven subspecies are recognised (Groombridge, 1982), but crocodilus, yacare and fuscus are the ones generally described in trade. C.c. fuscus has a distribution from southern Mexico through Central America to the coastal regions of Venezuela, Colombia and Ecuador; C.c. crocodilus occurs east of the Andes throughout the Amazon basin possibly as far south as extreme northern Bolivia and extreme northwestern Paraguay; C. c. yacare occupies the southernmost range of the species, occurring in southern Brazil, Bolivia, Paraguay, and northern Argentina (Groombridge, 1982; King, pers. comm.). All of these subspecies are on CITES Appendix II, but varying degrees of protection from exploitation and commercial export are given under national 77 Japan Imports laws in range countries. Although poorer in quality than Melanosuchus niger or the classic crocodilians, the Caiman skin trade forms the backbone of the Japanese industry. Dealers’ data by weight In the dealers’ data by weight, C. crocodilus maintained the top position for all years, ranging from 54.4% in 1977 to 70.8% in 12932 (Figure 4). The volume of imports by weight rose from 7459 kg in 1977 to 87 650 kg in 1984, to total 414 308 kg overall (Figure 6). Between 1982 and 1984 reported volumes were roughly double those of the preceding period, and 1984 represented an all-time high. 90000 Figure 6: Total imports by weight of Caiman crocodilus and top three countries of origin (including tanned skin pieces) Source: Dealers’ data Dealers’ data by number of skins By number of skins (exclusive of tanned skin pieces), the data showed a pattern of growth similar to that when the trade was analysed by weight, with the exception that 1984 imports declined slightly (Figure 7). A total of 1 344 451 dry- and wet-salted skins were reported, with imports ranging from a minimum of 70 733 skins in 1977 to a peak of 251 742 in 1983. Additionally, a total of 234 757 tanned skin pieces were imported between 1977 and 1982 (Figure 8). The trade peaked in 1979 at 106 073 skins, but over 50 000 skin pieces were imported in 1980 and 1981 before dropping off completely in 1983 and 1984. : 78 Japan Imports ( x 10,000pcs. ) 30 GA 6 251,742 LL oo A is EN. Anti! aq Others 20 187,557 18 10 Year Figure 7: Total number of Caiman crocodilus skins and top three countries of origin (excluding tanned skin pieces) Source: Dealers’ data ( x 100pes. ) 110 106,073 100 (ey Py BO 90 fa Others 80 70 83 84 Figure 8: Total number of Caiman crocodilus tanned skin pieces Source: Dealers’ data 79 Japan Imports Sources of skins Five countries: were declared as countries of origin for raw Caiman skins. Of these, Paraguay was by far the major exporter by weight, representing 85.3% of the total trade, followed by Colombia at 10%. Imports from Colombia declined sharply in 1978 when Paraguay emerged as the primary source for Caiman skins (Figure 6). Although supplying only 4.2% of the total trade by weight to become the third largest source of raw skins for the period examined, imports from the Netherlands Antilles were erratic. Trade was reported in only three years, but in 1979, 42.4% of all Caiman skins came from the Netherlands Antilles, surpassing trade from both Paraguay and Colombia (Figure 6). Finally, Peru and Venezuela appeared in the data as other minor sources. Patterns in the data change significantly, however, when the number of raw skins and their sources are analysed. More skins were received from Colombia or, in the case of 1979, from Colombia and the Netherlands Antilles, than from Paraguay up to 1980 (Figure 7), although by weight Paraguayan imports dominated the trade in 1978 and from 1980 onward (Figure 6). From 1981 to 1984 the number of skins received from Paraguay ranged from 63.1% to 87.4% of the total number, with Colombia accounting for most of the remainder. The tanned skin pieces were imported from five countries, with 70% of the trade originating from Paraguay (Figure 8). Bolivia accounted for most of the remainder, but small quantities of tanned skin pieces were also received from Argentina, Panama via West Germany, and Spain (country of origin not declared). Size of skins The average length of Caiman crocodilus skins from Colombia and the Netherlands Antilles was considerably smaller than the size of Paraguayan skins (Figure 9) (see Countries of origin/Export section). 200 180 160 \ aie Tae “e 140 \ 2 120 ey 100 Y MN ens0 cm) N. Anti | 60 — < ~ Ail og, OMS beet OO iia © lish OL ea eee OM: Year Figure 9: Average length of dry-salted Caiman crocodilus skins from Colombia, Netherlands Antilles, and Paraguay Source: Dealers’ data 80 Japan Imports Overall, the average length of raw Caiman skins showed a rather dramatic increase in length over the period examined (Figure 10). While a gradual increase in size was shown from 1977 to 1980, the average length of skin size climbed from 66.2 cm in 1977 to 160.2 em in 1982. 180 190 ie iGee (SF SOrubySilk pC2hagpoSuee 04 Year Figure 10: Overall annual average length of Caiman crocodilus skins Source: Dealers’ data Geographical variations in size are linked to the distribution of the different subspecies in trade: C.c. yacare is generally a much larger subspecies, attaining a size of 2.5m to 3m, while the maximum size of C.c. crocodilus is 2 m to 2.5 m (Groombridge, 1982). The fact that from 1977 through 1980 imports from Colombia and the Netherlands Antilles comprised from 66.7% to 83.7% of the total number of raw skins imported may explain the smaller average length for those years. Skins imported from those two countries were substantially smaller in size than those from Paraguay and were believed by the dealers to have originated in Colombia or north-western Brazil. Thus, they most probably represented the subspecies C.c. crocodilus. Rising trade volumes and the increased percentage of the total trade which Paraguayan skins represented from 1980 onward may explain the increase in average skin size over this period and could indicate that large numbers of C.c_ yacare skins were being imported. In fact, when interviewed dealers suggested that much of the trade from Paraguay originated from the Mato Grosso region of Brazil, where C.c. yacare is distributed, but nonetheless identified the bulk of the trade as C.c. crocodilus when responding to the questionnaire. Crocodylus novaeguineae ~ e Under CITES nomenclature, Crocodylus novaeguineae is treated as having two subspecies, the endangered C.n. mindorensis, which is endemic to the Philippines, and C.n. novaeguineae, with a range restricted to New Guinea 81 Japan Imports (Groombridge, 1982). The Philippine subspecies has been listed in Appendix I of CITES since 1975, but C.n. novaeguineae was considered to have exploitable populations in both Indonesia and Papua New Guinea and accordingly was listed in Appendix II. Additionally, ranching or captive-breeding operations in Papua New Guinea, Indonesia maintain commercial quantities of the species (Luxmoore et _al., 1985). (The Japanese Government, through an overseas development and agreement with the Philippines, is currently funding the construction of a captive-breeding Farm on the island of Palawan for C.n. mindorensis and C. porosus.) Dealers’ data by weight Readily available from neighbouring countries, C.n. novaeguineae is a very important species for Japanese importers. In the dealers’ data by weight, novaeguineae was overall the second most imported species in all years except 1982 and 1983 when imports of Alligator mississippiensis were greater. Imports totalled 103 932 kg over the period examined and, as a proportion of the total trade by weight, averaged 16% overall, ranging from 34.4% in 1977 to 8.6% in 1982 (Figure 4). Imports in 1977 represented a low of 4 721 kg, with trade peaking in 1984 at 23 214 kg (Figure 11). 25000 20000 15,165 18000 13,428 Year Figure 11: Total imports by weight of Crocodylus novaeguineae skins and top four countries of origin (including tanned skin pieces) Source: Dealers’ data - Dealers’ data by number of skins By number of skins, C.n. novaeguineae was the second most imported species in all years (Figure 5). A total of 78 987 wet-salted skins were imported, with numbers ranging from a low of 5766 skins in 1977 to a high of 12 562 skins in 1984 (Figure 12). The trade pattern exhibited in the data generally followed that of imports by weight-with the exception that in 1981, the number of skins decreased slightly, whereas by weight the pattern showed a slight gain (Figure 11). An additional 681 tanned skin pieces were also included in the data. 82 Japan Imports ( x 1,000pes.) 14 12 11,865 11,279 ZA Lea Figure 12: Total number of Crocodylus_novaeguineae skins and top four countries of origin (excluding tanned skin pieces) Source: Dealers’ data Sources of skins Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand and Singapore were all declared as countries of origin for imports of raw C.n. novaeguineae skins. Of these, Papua New Guinea and Indonesia were by far the most important sources. The proportion of imports by weight from Papua New Guinea ranged from 95% in 1980 to 57% in 1984, when imports from Indonesia increased substantially to 43% of the total trade (Figure 11). The proportion of Papua New Guinea imports by number of skins ranged from 77.3% in 1984 to 95.1% in 1980, while skins which originated in Indonesia accounted for between 4.6% in 1980 to 22.7% in 1984 (Figure 12). Again, this pattern was generally similar to the one for imports by weight. . Size of skins The average belly widths of C. novaeguineae skins varied considerably depending on the country of origin or export. The size of skins received directly from Papua New Guinea varied the least over time, whereas belly widths for skins received from Indonesia or re-exports from Singapore fluctuated during the period examined (Figure 13) (see Countries of origin/Export section). However, in Indonesia the method for measuring belly widths is apparently different from that in Papua New Guinea (Hall, pers. comm.). If Japanese dealers relied upon measurements reported on the invoices, respective figures for the two countries would possibly not be comparable. 83 : Japan Imports a — 2 2) Teta TZ) 78en 79 BO BTN CP UNGSNGA vear Figure 13: Average belly widths of wet-salted Crocodylus novaeguineae skins from Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Singapore, and Thailand Source: Dealers’ data til 28 Gee (Stee CO ence dees Oar” Be Year Figure 14: Overall annual average belly width. of wet-salted ‘Crocodylus novaeguineae skins Souree: Dealers’ data 84 Japan Imports Overall, the average width of novaeguineae skins increased gradually from 8.5 in (21.6 cm) in 1977 to 12.2 in (31 cm) in 1984 (Figure 14). This trend probably reflects the situation in Papua New Guinea, where exports of skins with belly widths smaller than 7 in (17.8 cm) were prohibited in 1981. The increasing proportion of larger skins from elsewhere, particularly Indonesia, makes the overall trend greater than that for Papua New Guinea alone. Crocodylus porosus Formerly distributed from the coasts of India throughout South Bast Asia, to northern Australia and the western Pacific, Crocodylus porosus is severely depleted and at risk almost throughout its range (Groombridge, 1982). Only the populations in Australia and New Guinea are recognised as being able to sustain commercial exploitation. As a result, most habitat countries protect C. porosus through domestic legislation, and the species was listed in CITES Appendix I in 1975. Since then, a variety of trading options have been developed. Ranching programmes exist in Papua New Guinea and Australia, and captive-breeding operations have been registered with the CITES Secretariat in Thailand and Australia. The population of Indonesia was transferred to Appendix II under a quota scheme in 1985. Initially, several countries placed reservations on C. porosus; now, only Austria, Japan, and Singapore hold reservations. Dealers’ data by weight C. porosus is very important in the Japanese trade, representing the highest quality crocodilian skin regularly imported into Japan in substantial quantities. In terms of overall trade, the dealers’ data showed C. porosus 10000 3000 8000 7000 6000 K 000 9 4000 3000 2000 1000 SG Others Figure 15: Total imports by weight of Crocodylus porosus skins showing top four countries of origin (including tanned skin pieces) Source: Dealers’ data 85 Japan Imports accounting for 5.6% of the total imports by weight, with a range from 2% in 1982 to 9.4% in 1977 (Figure 6). A total of 36 486 kg were imported, making C. porosus the fourth most imported species. By weight, imports fluctuated between 1291 kg in 1977 to 9755 kg in 1984 (Figure 15). Dealers' data by number of skins In terms of numbers, a total of 31 937 raw skins were imported (Figure 16), with imports ranging from a low of 1473 skins in 1977 to a high of 6050 skins in 1984. The general trend in the data for number of skins was similar to that for the trade by weight, with the exception that in 1981 the number of skins imported dropped, while the weight of the trade increased (Figure 15). An additional 150 pieces of tanned C. porosus were received in 1978 and 1982. ( x 1,000pes.) 7 6 ————) WA Figure 16: Total number of Crocodylus orosus skins showing top four countries of origin (excluding tanned skin pieces) Source: Dealers’ data Sources of skins Although Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Singapore, the Palau Islands, Malaysia, and the Solomon Islands are all declared as countries of origin, the two major suppliers, Papua New Guinea and Indonesia, together accounted for more than 85% of the raw skins in trade by weight. Imports by weight from Papua New Guinea generally declined from 75% of the total trade in 1977 to 36% in 1984. Imports from Indonesia rose from 5% in 1977 to 55% of the trade in 1984, to surpass Papua New Guinea as the major supplier of porosus skins. Erratic trade with the Solomon Islands began in 1981 and ranged from 2% in that year to 31% in 1982, an increase which was reflected in a relative decrease in imports from both Papua New Guinea and Indonesia (Figure 15). 86 Japan Imports When analysed by number of skins, trends for the three leading exporters are similar to those exhibited in the data by weight, except that in 1984 Papua New Guinea exported twice as many skins as Indonesia (Figure 16), while the data by weight showed Indonesian imports slightly surpassing Papua New Guinea for the first time in the period examined (Figure 15). The small quantity of tanned skin pieces reported by the dealers were received from France and Singapore. Size of skins With the exception of a very small quantity of tanned skin pieces, all C. porosus skins were wet-salted. Average belly widths fluctuated considerably, with the exception of trade from Papua New Guinea which gradually increased over the period examined (Figure 17). Skins from Indonesia, Solomon Islands and re-exports from Singapore were generally much larger than imports received directly from Papua New Guinea (see Countries of origin/Export section). Bh 1D/SG 60 35 30 45 40 35 30 ThevidtS.q) €8ta 80 gatSikan Coe p83ma8 8d Year Figure 17: Average belly widths of wet-salted Crocodylus porosus skins from Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Singapore, and the Solomon Islands Source: Dealers’ data Skins of Indonesian origin generally had larger average belly widths than exports from Papua New Guinea, where there is a maximum size limit. However, as previously mentioned, the two countries measure belly widths in different ways and the data may not be comparable. Overall, the average belly width of C. porosus increased from 7.6 in (19.3 cm) in 1977 to 13.3 in (33.8 cm) in 1984 (Figure 18). 87 Japan Imports r Ze | 29 | oe \ oe SK PILL Oe ar Van ~~ Bacal ik wy VA if DO) A =F 7 —+ QQ. — =y op) —— ---—-4----- qi ieme 79) 80 7 ol” 8283 ed Year Figure 18: Overall average annual belly width of wet-salted Crocodylus porosus skins. Source: Dealers’ data Alligator mississippiensis Restricted to the southern United States, the wild population of A. mississippiensis experienced a period of decline until the 1960s. Subsequent to the introduction of legal protection and sound management practices, populations of the species have gradually made a comeback. Originally placed in Appendix I of CITES, A. mississippiensis was moved to Appendix II in 1979. Exploitation of wild populations and commercial export of skins is strictly regulated under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Commercial farming and ranching is also practised in Florida and Louisiana (Luxmoore et al, 1985). Delaers' data by weight Reflecting the resumption of legal export of skins from the United States, A. mississippiensis appeared in the dealers’ data only from 1981 onward (Figure 19). The species rapidly regained a fair share of the Japanese market, displacing both Crocodylus novaeguineae and C. porosus to rank as the second most imported species in 1982 and 1983 (Figure 4). A total of 71 669 kg of skins were imported during the period examined. Japan Imports 25000 ant K 20000 oe | 18,494 tt ere 7S) WAG Sl ~~ 62 oS ek Year Figure 19: Total imports by weight of Alligator mississippiensis skins (including tanned skin pieces) Source: Dealers’ data Dealers’ data by number of skins A total of 19 116 wet-salted skins were imported, with trade expanding from a low of 2790 skins in 1981 to a high of 6508 skins in 1983 (Figure 20). An additional 246 tanned skins were imported in 1984. Sources of skins Most skins were received from the USA, although 670 kg of wet-salted and 167 kg of tanned skins were declared by dealers as re-exports via France. Size of skins The overall average length of A. mississippiensis skins ranged from 6.6 £t (201.2 cm) in 1981 to 6.9 Ft (210.3 cm) in 1984. Skins originating in Florida averaged slightly shorter at 6.2 ft (189 cm). An average length of 8.3 ft (253 cm) was reported for the small quantity of wet-salted skins from France (see Countries of origin/Export section). 89 Japan Imports ( x 1,000pes.) > r 6,508 | — | i 3 4 tial 5,448 j RIL | J} | eoe4i 37/0 | in | | | i db lee | TEA Sy SES 7S) ec ORT MO Oo Jee toni oe pal aos Year Figure 20: Total number of Alligator mississippiensis skins (excluding tanned skin pieces) Source: Dealers’ data Crocodylus siamensis A South East Asian species, Crocodylus siamensis has been extirpated throughout most of its former range. In the recent past, only one viable wild population has been identified in Thailand, although small, isolated groups may still exist elsewhere in the region (Groombridge, 1982). However, a large captive population exists on a commercial farm in Thailand. C. siamensis was listed in CITES Appendix I in 1975, but Thailand placed a reservation on the species when she ratified CITES in 1983. The need for the reservation, however, became redundant in July 1985, with the registration of the captive—breeding facility and it was withdrawn in 1987. Dealers’ data by weight With strictly limited sources, the species plays a marginal role in the Japanese trade. Nonetheless, wet-salted skins were imported from 1978 to 1982 and in 1984, according to the dealers’ data (Figure 21). The total quantity reported amounted to 20 354 kg, corresponding to 3.1% of total crocodilian skin imports by weight reported by the dealers. Imports ranged from 1173 kg in 1981 to a peak of 5642 kg in 1984. : Dealers’ data by number of skins In terms of numbers, 3104 skins were imported (Figure 22). The trade pattern for imports by numbers was slightly different from that for imports by weight. The number of skins imported from Thailand ranged from 200 in 1981 and 1982 to 800 in 1984. These skins possibly represent the total extent of international trade in C. siamensis. 90 6UUU eae if GS 979. 80) 181 62 Co cs Figure 21: Total imports by weight of Crocodylus siamensis Source: Dealers' data ( x 100pcs.) 1800 8 = | Cie 10 1 PR COG 1Ye G24) CSR ace Year Figure 22: Total number of Crocodylus siamensis skins Source: Dealers’ data Japan Imports 91 Sources of skins All skins originating in Thailand and are presumed to represent farmed stock, and the quantities exported are comparable to the farm production reported by Luxmoore et al. 1985. Size of skins The annual average width of C. siamensis skins rose slightly from 50.8 cm in 1978 to 53.3 cm in 1984 (see Countries of origin/Export section). Crocodylus niloticus Broadly distributed throughout Africa south of the Sahara, the population status of Crocodylus niloticus varies considerably throughout its range (Groombridge, 1982). Originally placed in Appendix I of CITES in 1975, the introduction of export quotas for some countries in 1985, and the recognition of captive—breeding and ranching schemes for others has opened up a variety of trade possibilities, resulting in the downlisting of specific populations to Appendix II. Traditionally a species fundamental to the European trade, very limited and irregular trade with Japan has occurred over the years. A trade mission of Japanese importers to several African nations in 1985, however, may establish new direct trade routes, stimulating future imports to Japan. Dealers’ data by weight In the dealers’ data, a total of 1317 kg of C. niloticus skins was imported during the period examined, corresponding to 0.2% of the total trade. Small volumes were imported between 1977 and 1981, ranging from a low of 20 kg in 1977 to a high of 503 kg in 1981 (Figure 23). Trade resumed in 1984 with the importation of 128 kg. 600 300 400 K 300 200 100 Tia (Orn ioe Oe Ole Ole Soe OR Year Figure 23: Total imports by weight of Crocodylus niloticus skins (including ; tanned skin pieces) Source: Dealers’ data 92 Japan Imports Dealers’ data by number of skins Raw skins were imported in only three years and totalled 475 skins (Appendix 3). Additionally, 4068 tanned skin pieces were received during the period examined. Sources of skins Only two African countries were identified by the dealers as countries of origin, namely South Africa, from which 170 kg of raw skins were received in 1978, and Zimbabwe, which accounted for all of the raw skins imported in 1981 and 1984 (Appendix 3). All imports of tanned skin pieces came from France or Italy, with no countries of origin given. Size of skins The average width of the raw skins from South Africa and Zimbabwe measured between 34 cm and 41.6 cm. For the tanned skin pieces imported from France and Italy, the average widths ranged between 20 cm and 24.3 cm (see Countries of Origin/Export section). Crocodylus cataphractus Distributed in western and central Africa, Crocodylus_cataphractus populations are regarded as threatened in many countries, the decline attributable to excessive hide-hunting (Groombridge, 1982). Listed in Appendix I of CITES in 1975, Austria continues to hold reservations with respect to this species although formerly France, Italy and Zambia also held reservations. Imports of C. cataphractus into Japan have been very limited in the past, according to dealers. The population in Congo was transferred to Appendix II in 1987 under a quota system. Imports of tanned C. cataphractus skins, all from France, were reported for the years 1977 to 1980 (Figure 35). These imports totalled only 923 kg and represented only 0.1% of the total trade for that period. The trade totalled 6148. skin pieces. No information was provided on country of origin and there has been no reported trade since then. The yearly average width of C. cataphractus skins ranged from a low of 19.5 cm in 1979 to a high of 23.5 cm in 1978 (see Countries of origin/Export section). 93 Japan Imports 300 445 400 300 g 203 200 155 120 Te (18. are ereOee-Sotenndz = 83. SA Year Figure 24: Total imports by weight of Crocodylus cataphractus (all tanned skin pieces) Source: Dealers’ data Melanosuchus niger Formerly widely distributed throughout the Amazon basin, Melanosuchus niger is now depleted or absent from large areas of its former range (Groombridge, 1982). Now generally protected in range countries through domestic wildlife legislation, internationally the species has been listed in CITES Appendix I since 1975. Although considered to be the prized species in the South American skin trade, M. niger plays an extremely limited role in the Japanese trade. Japanese dealers reported trade in M. niger only during two years. In 1977, 20 kg of tanned skins were imported via Hong Kong. This trade numbered 152 skins and originated in Paraguay. The following year 806 kg of dry-salted skins were received from France, but declared as having originated in Suriname. These imports totalled 516 skins. Overall, trade in the species amounted to a meagre 0.1% of total imports by weight for the period. The Paraguayan skins averaged 31 cm in width. Suriname skins were measured in length and averaged 152.4 cm (see Countries of origin/Export section). (Other skins reported in the data as wet-salted Caiman c. crocodilus from Paraguay could have also represented this species, according to some dealers.) 94 Japan Imports COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN/EXPORT Latin America and the Caribbean Overview In terms of sheer volume, South America has been the major source of crocodilian skins for Japan. On the basis of Customs data, since 1977, no less than 55% of Japan's annual total imports by weight have originated in Latin American or Caribbean countries (Figure 3). By far the biggest individual supplier of skins was Paraguay (Figure 25). However, a wildlife export ban has been in effect in Paraguay since 1975 and the CITES Management Authority has not issued any permits since 29 July 1982. The development of Paraguay as a major source of skins for Japan only began in 1977, two years after the ban on hunting and exporting of wildlife became effective. Therefore, the bulk of the Japanese trade through 1984 was dependent upon a legally closed supply. The second major source of skins for Japan has been Colombia. From 1970 through 1973, Colombia was the biggest supplier in South America, but its importance rapidly declined as Paraguay'’s increased (Figure 25). 100 90 go --- Year Figure 25: % of total Latin America/Caribbean imports by weight originating from Paraguay and Colombia Source: Japanese Customs statistics 95 Japan Imports (In April 1985, new regulations entered into effect in Japan which required CITES export permits instead of country of origin certificates, which previously had been considered sufficient documentation by government authorities. Since implementation of the new regulations, reported imports from Paraguay apparently have ceased. With the halt in imports from Paraguay in mid-1985, imports from Colombia have more than doubled in volume compared with the levels reported from 1982 to 1984, according to Customs data, and represent 14% of Japanese imports From South America in 1985.) Japanese Customs data show sporadic, but sizeable imports of crocodilian skins from other Latin American countries and the Caribbean, for example: 11 136 kg from Panama in 1977; 29 870 kg from Suriname and 15 785 kg from Netherlands Antilles in 1979. The sudden nature of both the appearance and disappearance of such trade suggests either opportunistic exploitation of populations or inadequate regulatory controls. The Netherlands Antilles, for example, do not have commercially viable populations of crocodilians (Groombridge, pers. comm.), thus the skins must have originated elsewhere. Crocodilian leather has also been imported in sizeable amounts from South America, principally from Bolivia and Paraguay, according to the dealers, but Honduras also appeared in the Customs statistics as a source of skins. Argentina In 1979, dealers report the import of 168 kg of tanned Caiman crocodilus crocodilus, representing 3333 skin pieces, from Argentina. Customs data show the import of 188 kg in 1978 and 168 kg in 1979, the .latter in complete correlation with the dealers’ data. The skins reported by the dealers averaged 150 cm in length, but varied from 100 cm to 270 cm (Appendix 5). Based on these data, it does not appear that Argentina has been a major supplier of crocodilian skins to Japan. Bolivia Imports of tanned Caiman crocodilus crocodilus skins from Bolivia are reported in the dealers’ data from 1977 to 1982. These imports totalled 5362 kg by weight and numbered 64 367 skin pieces (Figures 26 and 27). The size range of these skins remained fairly constant throughout the period with a minimum length of 100 cm and a maximum of 230 cm. Yearly averages ranged From 151.4 cm to 160 cm in length (Appendix 5). By weight, Customs data for crocodile leather imports showed a peak in 1980 following three years of growth and preceding three years of decline. The dealers' data showed a peak of 27 240 skins from Bolivia in 1979 and no trade since 1983. Customs also reported the import of 1600 kg of raw skins in 1977, but there was no corresponding report from the dealers (Appendix 1). The correlation between the Customs statistics for imports of crocodilian leather and the dealers' data was poor with the exception of 66.9% correlation in 1979 (Figure 26). It is also worth noting that the skins were all described as C.c. crocodilus, a subspecies which probably does not occur in exploitable numbers in Bolivia (King, pers. comm.). 96 Japan Imports 3,222 Dealers 3000 2,888 2,693 CUSTOMS 1,631 1,530 975) 12006 260 Z, a2 83S ARS GW Year Figure 26: Total imports by weight of tanned skin pieces from Bolivia Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers' data ( xX 1,000pcs. )y 30 27,240 77 78 79 80 81 82 Figure 27: Total number of tanned skin pieces of Caiman crocodilus from Bolivia Source: Dealers’ data 97 Japan Imports Colombia Wet- or dry-salted Caiman crocodilus crocodilus skins were imported from Colombia every year, according to the dealers. The trade totalled 39 945 kg and represented 456 635 skins (Figures 28 and 29). The trade pattern for imports by number of skins was similar to that for imports by weight, but it is clear that the average size of skins Fluctuated with a general trend toward progressively smaller skins. a ee 6,778 7 Dealers ee [_] customs 15000 12000 K S0c0 8,996 ees g 6,916 ol g000 ts.dal Lal YZ Yj fi sa GY Y Y) Y 4150 3000 j j j j Z igi j 2,380 Uy Year Figure 28: Total imports by weight from Colombia Source: Japanese Customs statistics and dealers’ data Both Customs and dealers’ data show a steady growth in imports from Colombia from 1977 through 1979, followed by a substantial drop in 1981. The correlation with the Customs data was best in 1983 at 77.7%, but generally remained around 40% (Figure 28). Although Customs data also showed imports of crocodilian leather from Colombia, there was no corresponding report of any leather imports by the dealers. With the exception of 350 kg in 1981 and 275 kg in 1984, all the skins were dry-salted and in each year the minimum length was 16 in (40.6 cm). Average lengths for the entire period varied between 19.6 in and 24.1 in (49.8 cm and 61.2 cm), with the maximum reported length ranging from 32 in 81.3 cm) in 1982 and 1983 to 50 in (127 cm) in 1979 and 1980 (Appendix 5). 98 Japan Imports ( x 1,000pes.) 0 (es) (=) Lia a 28,000 Ti 1S) 1S CO Sl e2a ics Bd Year Figure 29: Total number of Caiman crocodilus skins from Colombia Source: Dealers’ data Colombia’s role in the trade is hard to assess from a legal standpoint. Although hunting of caimans has been restricted for some time, selected companies were allowed to export inventoried stocks until 1984. Since then, all exports have been banned. Poor enforcement of protection laws has resulted in abuse of export restrictions (Donadio, 1982). Presently, Japanese dealers believe that much of the trade from Colombia actually represents skins acquired from the upper Amazon region of Brazil, since local Caiman populations are depleted (Groombridge, 1982). Netherlands Antilles A total of 16 765 kg of dry-salted Caiman crocodilus crocodilus skins was imported from the Netherlands Antilles according to the dealers’ data, with over 90% of the trade occurring in 1979 (Figure 30). The number of skins from the Netherlands Antilles fluctuated from 9128 skins in 1978 to 84 551 skins the following year. In 1980 the figure dropped to 18 125 skins. Skin sizes in the three years for which there was data ranged from a minimum of 18 in (45.7 cm) in length to a maximum of 39 in (99.1 cm), with respective annual averages of 21 in (53.3 cm), 25 in (63.5 cm), and 20 in (50.8 cm) (Appendiz 5). In comparison, Customs data showed substantially more trade in 1977 and 1978, but in 1979 and 1980 the correlation was 96.5% and 100% (Figure 30). 99 Japan Imports 16000 ayes 777) Dealers nee. [_] customs 12000 10000 K 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 Figure 30: Total imports by weight from the Netherlands Antilles Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers' data The irregular but substantial imports from the Netherlands Antilles, particularly as C.c. crocodilus does not occur in the islands, suggests trans-shipment of skins from elsewhere, some of which could have been illicit. Several sources thought that these skins probably came from the Brazilian Amazonia, Venezuela or Colombia. Panama The dealers' data showed the import of tanned Caiman _crocodilus crocodilus skins from Panama via F.R. Germany in 1980, the only record of any trade with Panama (Figure 31). These imports weighed 230 kg and represented 1645 skin pieces, with a minimum length of 115 cm, a maximum length of 270 cm and an average size of 150 cm (Appendix 5). Customs statistics also show imports of crocodilian leather from Panama from 1977 through 1980, as well as imports of raw crocodilian skins in 1977, and 1980 (Figure 32). Clearly the correlation between the data supplied by the dealers and the Customs statistics is very poor. Furthermore, it should be noted that C.c. crocodilus does not occur in Panama; the skins were either misidentified C.c. fuscus or were not of Panamanian origin. 100 Japan Imports V4 Dealers [| Customs (ie Om erg 9 OO oly 7525 $e oRed Year Figure 31: Total imports by weight of crocodilian leather from Panama Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers’ data . Figure 32: Total imports by weight of raw crocodilian skins from Panama Source: Japanese Customs statistics 101 Japan Imports Paraguay Both the Customs statistics and the data provided by the Japanese importers show Paraguay to be the major supplier of dry- and wet-salted Caiman crocodilus skins to Japan. According to the dealers, these imports totalled 326 758 kg. Both sets of data showed a substantial jump in import levels by weight in 1982 (Figure 33). Correlation between the two sets improved from 6.7% in 1977 to 72.6% in 1984. 160 as Dealers 138,576 feel CUSTOMS 140 se 117,456 5 100 ie 4 80 76,261 “oy G ; 60 52,343 49,558 j Y ] ; AQ “ee “Cpe y j j 20 25,5 19:6 ema Y Y) ZY Y 1 Ta Figure 33: Total imports by weight of raw skins from Paraguay Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers' data A total of 765 433 raw skins were reported by the dealers, ranging from 1000 skins in 1977 to 196 742 skins in 1983 (Figure 34). According to the data supplied by the dealers, both C.c. crocodilus and C.c. yacare were imported and some imports were received via Argentina and Uruguay. C.c. crocodilus skins were either dry- or wet-salted, but all C.c. yacare skins were wet-salted. Caiman skins, which are considerably less valuable than classic crocodilian skins, are usually shipped dry-salted in order to keep costs low. It is therefore surprising that considerable quantities of wet-salted C.c. yacare skins were reported from 1978 through 1984. The average length of the C.c. crocodilus skins received directly from Paraguay ranged from 100.8 cm in 1978 to 171.1 cm in 1983 with both the smallest and the largest skins reported in 1981, 55 cm and 340 cm respectively. The largest size apparently represents an abberation in the data as the maximum size in other years was 280 cm (Appendix 5). 102 Japan Imports ( x 10,000pcs.) 5) 6,742 20r 195,075196/742 141 449 | aaa | | | | | | | | 10 30,550 30,022 24,945 EES OPS EU iI) apd AIED tg 86! Figure 34: Total number of raw Caiman crocodilus skins from Paraguay Source: Dealers’ data The average length of the C.c. yacare skins ranged from 162.2 cm in 1979 to 205.8 cm in 1978. The maximum length of skin in every year was 270 cm and the minimum ranged from 115 cm to 150 cm (Appendix 5). The average width of skins ranged from 87.8 cm in 1981 to 112.1 cm in 1978. Minimum widths ranged from 50 cm to 75 cm and maximum widths were from 125 cm to 200 cm in 1978 (Appendix 6), a significantly bigger width than recorded in any other year remembering that the maximum length remained 270 cm. Tanned skin pieces, which totalled 164 912 Caiman crocodilus skin pieces and 152 Melanosuchus niger skin pieces, were imported from 1977 to 1982 in the dealers’ data. Customs statistics also showed imports of crocodile and alligator leather from Paraguay in 1983 and 1984 (Figure 35). Correlation with Customs totals was quite good in 1979 to 1981, but deteriorated from 1982 onwards. The M. niger skins weighed 20 kg, had an average width of 31 cm (Appendix 6), and were imported in 1977 via Hong Kong. All other tanned skins were described as Caiman c. crocodilus. During the period examined, Paraguay was Japan's biggest supplier of crocodilian skins, despite the fact that exports have been banned since 1975. Dealers indicated that most skins imported from Paraguay come from the Mato Grosso region of south-west Brazil. If so, the trade would probably represent yacare rather than crocodilus skins. 103 Japan Imports 14000 | os Dealers (an Custons 12000 10000 9,628 = 5000 | K 6,687 6,682 g 6000 , Tl tele te ro 80 ~—s 8] 82 83 84 Year Figure 35: Total imports by weight of tanned skins/leather from Paraguay Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers’ data Peru Dry-salted Caiman crocodilus crocodilus skins were imported from Peru only in 1978, both the dealers’ data and the Customs statistics showing a figure of 1445 kg. The 10 000 skins ranged in length from 21 in to 39 in (53.3 cm to 99.1 cm), with an average of 26 in (66 cm) (Appendix 5). Suriname The only trade reported from Suriname came via France in 1978 and represented 516 dry-salted Melanosuchus niger skins. The skins totalled 806 kg and ranged from 4 ft to 6 Ft (121.9 cm to 182.9 cm) in length (Appendix 5). However, Customs data show the import of 1606 kg of skins from Suriname in 1978 (possible correlation of 50% with the dealers’ data), followed by 29 870 kg in 1979 and nothing since (Appendix 1). As with the Netherlands Antilles, the sudden appearance and disappearance of a substantial trade suggests a brief intense exploitation of a wild population or a legal loophole. Venezuela The data supplied by the dealers showed the import of 800 kg of raw Caiman c. crocodilus skins in 1978. The number of skins totalled 579 and had a minimum length of 180 cm and a maximum of 270 cm (with no average recorded) (Appendix 5). Customs statistics showed 98 kg in 1977 and 2224 kg in 1978 - (correlation of 36%) (Appendix 1). These data indicate that Venezuela was not a major supplier of skins to Japan during the period examined. 104 Japan Imports Other Latin America/Caribbean countries Two other South American countries are reported in the Customs statistics which are not included in the dealers' data. In 1977 and 1978, Guyana was the source of 230 kg and 879 kg of raw crocodilian skins respectively. More significantly, French Guiana appeared in the data as the country of origin for 4472 kg and 5832 kg of skins in 1978 and 1979 (Appendix 1). North America overview The sudden availability of Alligator mississippiensis has opened up a new source of supplies which Japan has been quick to exploit. The growth of imports from the USA since 1979 has been rapid and, with one year's exception, consistently large. According to the dealers, Alligator skins combine the useful attribute of Caiman skins of larger body lengths relative to width, with the superior quality of Crocodylidae species. However, the market is reportedly limited and nearly at capacity levels now, according to Japanese dealers. United States The dealers reported imports of wet-salted Alligator mississippiensis skins from 1981 onwards. According to the Customs data, Japan began importing skins from the USA in 1979, following transfer of the species from Appendix I to Appendix II of CITES. Imports from the USA have increased from nothing in 1978 to a peak of 26 036 xg in 1983 according to Japanese Customs data (Figure 36). TIO TS BT eT. Goes. MISA Figure 36: Total imports by weight of skins from the USA Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers’ data 105 Japan Imports Dealers reported imports totalling 71 669 kg and representing 19 362 skins from 1981 to 1984. Correlation between Customs data and the data supplied by the dealers was very good for those years (Figure 36) and presumably the absence of dealers’ data in 1979 and 1980 was due to the absence of response from the importers concerned. In 1981, dealers reported importing 147 kg more than the Customs figure. With the exception of 6650 kg from Florida in 1984, all direct imports From the USA reportedly originated in Louisiana. The minimum length in each year was 4 ft (121.9 cm), the maximum in 1981 was 12 Ft (365.8 cm), but 13 Ft (396.2 cm) in all other years (Appendix 5). The average length of skins ranged between 6.6 ft and 6.8 ft (201.2 cm and 207.3 cm). An additional 670 kg of wet-salted skins and 167 kg of tanned A. mississippiensis were also reported by the dealers as imports from the USA via France in 1984. The wet-salted skins were exceptionally large, averaging 8.3 Ft (253 cm) (Appendix 5), while the tanned pieces had an average width of 48 cm (Appendix 6). Asia and Oceania overview Although Japan's total imports of crocodilian skins have risen sharply, imports From Asia and Oceania have remained proportionally small (Figure 56), despite the availability of at least two commercially attractive species and the inherent advantage conferred by Japan's proximity to the countries of origin. This is probably the result of several factors, chief amongst them that Asian stocks for the most part have been severely depleted (Groombridge, 1982) and that the classic skins which they produce represent the higher priced end of the Japanese market where consumer demand is more limited. Two species, C. porosus and C. novaeguineae, are involved in the vast majority of the trade although C. siamensis skins are imported from Thailand. C. porosus is regarded by Japanese dealers as a particularly high quality skin and represents the top end of the market both in terms of price and prestige. Items made of C. porosus will cost between 30% and 50% more than similar items made of C. novaeguineae, although the latter is also highly regarded. The principal suppliers have been Papua New Guinea and Indonesia, although significant amounts have been imported from Singapore, Thailand and Malaysia. Imports from the Solomon Islands have been relatively large since 1982 and the consistent appearance of trade from the Philippines is worth mentioning as the endangered endemic subspecies C.n. mindorensis is found there and could be affected by the trade. Among the principal traders, Papua New Guinea was the largest single contributor of skins by weight for the region in most years from 1977 to 1984, although Indonesia also provided substantial quantities of skins particularly in recent years (Figure 37). Singapore was also the reported source of large numbers of crocodile skins, particularly in 1977 and 1980. Imports from Thailand were sporadic but quite sizeable in 1979 and 1984 (Appendix 1). 106 TE PAP QROSETQMOS MERE O rae AG 4 ee eal we ve Year Figure 37: % of total Asia/Oceania imports by weight from Papua New Guinea and Indonesia Source: Japanese Customs statistics Indonesia Two species have been imported from Indonesia, Crocodylus porosus and C. novaeguineae. The dealers reported quantities of wet-salted skins of both species in every year. It is apparent From the outset that the trade patterns of skins from Indonesia are complex as dealers report importing skins direct from Indonesia, from Indonesia via Singapore and from Singapore via Indonesia. For the purposes of this analysis, skins direct from Indonesia and from Indonesia via Singapore are combined. Those skins which were described by the dealers as originally from Singapore but imported via Indonesia were treated as of Singapore origin, although it is very possible that they in Fact originated in Indonesia. The dealers reported a total of 24 869 kg of skins, with over half of the trade occurring in 1984 (Figure 38). Comparison of Customs data and dealers’ reports showed a wide discrepancy in the volumes reported, indicating that there is a considerable‘ volume of skins which is unaccounted for. Correlation was below 30% for all years except 1984 (Figure 38). Although both species are imported from Indonesia, the total volume of trade in C. novaeguineae was greater. Imports by weight of wet-salted C.n. novaeguineae skins increased from under 600 kg annually between 1977 and 1980 to 9940 kg in 1984 (Figure 39). Imports of C. porosus skins fluctuated between 59 kg in 1977 and 3587 kg in 1984 (Figure 40). Japan Imports 0000 - 28.477 WA Dealers 26,036 | (al Custons ao ais | 20000 | K 18000 g 10000 3000 0 Figure 38: Total imports by weight of skins from Indonesia Source: Japanese Customs statistics/dealers' data 10000 cbaes 8000 6000 3 4000 2000 0 ee \esn8 Foie 80 81 Clit eras) Sae84 Figure 39: Imports by weight of wet-salted Crocodylus novaeguineae skins from Indonesia Source: Dealers’ data 108 Japan Imports ae 3000 K 2000 1000 Year Figure 40: Imports by weight of wet-salted Crocodylus porosus from Indonesia Source: Dealers’ data ( x pe.) 2000 if 2,856 77) POLS) TONG SG" G81 = oz co ares. Year Figure 41: Total number of Crocodylus novaeguineae skins from Indonesia Source: Dealers’ data 109 Japan Imports The trade represented a total of 8789 C. novaeguineae skins (Figure 41) and 7196 C. porosus skins (Figure 42). The trends were similar to those for the trade by weight, except that the number of C. porosus skins imported declined in 1981. 1,820 ees Gmmaey Seam OO PONE OZ oe” Oe Year Figure 42: Total number of Crocodylus porosus skins from Indonesia Source: Dealers’ data Comparing the two species by number of skins, imports of C. porosus were greater from 1978 to 1980. In 1981 the pattern reversed itself and the ‘number of novaeguineae skins in trade from Indonesia were approximately double the number of porosus. C. novaeguineae skins directly from Indonesia averaged between 26.9 cm and 39.6 cm in width, but the minimum widths ranged between 10.2 cm in 1977 and 25.4 cm in 1980 and 1982. Maximum widths ranged from a low of 38.1 cm in 1977 to an exceptionally large 83.8 cm in 1980. Smaller sized skins of Indonesian origin were re-exported from Singapore in 1979 and 1980, but from 1981 to 1984 the average width of Singaporean re-export was consistently greater than skins received directly from Indonesia (Appendix 6). C._porosus skins were generally larger than C. novaeguineae skins. Average widths ranged from 33 cm in 1981 to 48.8 cm in 1984 for direct imports from Indonesia, but re-exports From Singapore were either consistently smaller at 17.8 cm in 1980 or considerably larger at 54.4 cm and 63.5 cm in 1981 and 1979 respectively (Appendix 6). 110 Japan Imports Malaysia The dealers reported importing 250 kg of wet-salted Crocodylus porosus directly from Malaysia in 1982 and 150 kg in 1984, involving 100 and 200 skin pieces respectively. Wet-salted C. porosus skins imported via Singapore, but declared as originating in Malaysia, were also imported. This trade amounted to 250 kg, 400 kg and 88 kg in 1979, 1980, and 1981 respectively (Figure 43) and comprised 221 skins. 1,996 (7 Dealers (__] Customs Figure 43: Total imports by weight from Malaysia Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers’ data Japanese Customs report imports from Malaya and Sabah, both part of Malaysia. Therefore these totals were combined when analysing the Malaysian data. With the exception of 1980, the correlation between the data is poor (Figure 43). No trade is reported by the dealers in 1977, and in 1979 no trade from Malaysia is reported by Customs, perhaps because the skins went through Singapore. The width of the skins direct from Malaysia ranged from a minimum of 20 in (50.8 cm) to a maximum of 40 in (101.6 cm), with an average of 22.5 in (57.2 cm) in 1982 and 25 in (63.5 em) in 1984. The skins imported via Singapore were smaller, having a minimum width of 10 in (25.4 cm) and a maximum width of 23:in (58.4 cm), with averages of between 14 in and 21 in (35.6 cm and 53.3 cm) (Appendix 6). Palau Islands The dealers reported importing 191 kg, representing 58 pieces of wet—salted Crocodylus porosus skins from the Palau Islands in 1978 and 96 wet-salted pieces (no weight given) in 1979. Customs statistics recorded progressively decreasing imports from 1978 to 1980 from the Marianas, 111 Japan Imports Marshall, and Caroline Islands (Figure 44). The two sets of data show a poor correlation of 51% in 1978 and O in 1980. (In the Japanese Customs data, trade from Palau would be included under the Marianas, Marshall and Caroline Islands.) 400 - m7 V/A beaiers (| Customs 300 + 247 K 200 191 g 119 100 : ii ris) 19 80 81 82 83 8d Year Figure 44: Total imports by weight from Palau Islands Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers' data The average width of the skins was 15 in (38.1 cm) in 1978 and 16 in (40.6 cm) in 1979, with a minimum width of 4 in (10.2 cm) and a maximum of 24 in (61 cm) in 1978. No maximum or minimum values were given for 1979. Papua New Guinea The dealers’ data for 1977 through 1984 showed consistent imports of both Crocodylus_porosus and C. novaeguineae skins from Papua New Guinea. The trends exhibited by the dealers’ data (which include re-exports of Papua New Guinea skins from Singapore) and Customs statistics are similar (Figure 45). Correlation between the two sets of data is very good in most years, although in both 1978 and 1979 the dealers reported a bigger total volume than was recorded in Customs. q Excluding re-exports from Singapore, imports by weight’ of wet-salted C. novaeguineae skins rose from 3646 kg in 1977 to peak at 12 882 kg in 1984 (Figure 46). Wet-salted C. novaeguineae skins, described as from Papua New Guinea but imported via Singapore, were also reported by the dealers from 1979 to 1984 although in declining volumes with the exception of imports in 1981 which peaked at 3244 kg (Figure 47). Clearly from these data, at least the dealers who submitted information are increasingly importing C. novaeguineae skins direct from Papua New Guinea. 112 Japan Imports 4 Dealers 21,827 Customs — 17,816 = x x e| = wo] = ~) uw w uw w ie (=) 2) (=) =) a wo So a w am he _| roy i) N ° i: ° Cen WS: we os nN ) XM K ii 3 10000 97635 9,892 Y 5000 | « ist? Z Z Y, ~J [@ =) fos) (a) fos) co) ©o ise) fon) CO oo f= Year Figure 45: Total imports by weight from Papua New Guinea (including re-exports from Singapore Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers' data 12,882 : 10,556 10,412 10000 8000 K g 6000 4000 2000 PTR AS peut Bag) SON SLA G2." tycore GF Figure 46: Direct imports by weight of Crocodylus novaeguineae skins from Papua New Guinea Source: Dealers’ data Japan Imports 3500 3000 2500 2000 K g 1500 1000 900 : Ws 80 81 82 83 84 Figure 47: Imports by weight of Crocodylus novaeguineae skins from Papua New Guinea via Singapore Source: Dealers’ data Over the entire period a total of 69 690 C. novaeguineae skins were imported, with the highest trade levels registered of 1979 and 1980 (Figure 48). ( x 1,000pes.) a 12 r 10,624°-10,728 10 (t (eo Owenoee Ol ar Clee Oly co soe Figure 48: Total numbers of Crocodylus novaeguineae skins imported from Papua New Guinea. Source: Dealers’ data 114 Japan Imports From 1977 to 1981 the widths of the C. novaeguineae skins directly imported from Papua New Guinea ranged from a minimum of 4 in (10.2 cm) to a maximum of 20 in (50.8 cm) with an average width of between 8 in and 10 in (20.3 cm and 25.4 cm). From 1981 onward, when Papua New Guinea raised the minimum skin width allowed for export to 7 in (17.8 cm), the dealers' data showed the average width increasing to between 10.4 in and 11.1 in (26.4 and 28.2 cm), although the maximum size of 20 in (50.8 cm) remained constant, in line with export regulations (Appendix 6). Skins imported via Singapore were comparably larger in 1979 and 1984, and approximately the same in 1981. In 1982 and 1983, however, both the minimum (15.2 cm) and maximum (61 cm and 71.1 cm) measurements reported by the dealers were outside Papua New Guinea regulation sizes indicating that some of the skins may not have been sanctioned exports to Singapore (Appendix 6). In 1979, 65 kg of tanned C. novaeguineae skins were imported from France, but with Papua New Guinea declared as the country of origin. These skins totalled 613 pieces and averaged 24 in (61 cm) in width, measuring between 15 in and 29 in (38.1 cm and 73.7 cm). Wet-salted C. porosus skins were also imported by the dealers from Papua New Guinea in quantities which increased from 968 kg in 1977 to 3525 kg in 1984 (Figure 49). FA dda © Riad AS ryt, alin aha © Aceh Figure 49: Direct imports by weight of Crocodylus porosus skins from Papua New Guinea Source: Dealers’ data C. porosus skins described as from Papua New Guinea but imported via Singapore are reported by the dealers in 1979, 1981 and 1983. The skins were wet-salted and weighed 773 kg, and 688 kg respectively. By number of skins, the trends were similar with the dealers reporting a total of 21 434 skins for the period examined (Figure 50). 115 Japan Imports (x 1,000pes, ) Ala) 1Z 10 + Oo ——- oO? —+--- f= IND Year Figure 50: Total number of Crocodylus porosus skins from Papua New Guinea Source: Dealers’ data The maximum width reported for direct imports from Papua New Guinea was uniformly 29 in (50.8 cm) each year. The minimum was 4 in (10.2 cm) until 1983 when it rose to 7 in (17.8 cm). Average widths ranged from 7 in (17.8 cm) to 10.7 in (27.4 cm) during the period examined (Appendix 6). The average width of skins imported via Singapore ranged from 10 in to 14 in (25.4 cm to 35.6 cm), with a minimum of 6 in (15.2 cm) and maximum of 35 in (88.9 cm) (Appendix 6). The maximum of 35 in (88.9 cm) reported in 1979 is above the size range permitted by the Papua New Guinea Government, as is the minimum of 6 in (15.2 cm) reported in 1983. This would seem to suggest that at least some of the skins were illegally taken out of Papua New Guinea to Singapore. Imports of C. novaeguineae are about three times greater by number than imports of C. porosus in all years examined. Philippines The dealers reported importing wet-salted Crocodylus novaeguineae from the Philippines in: 1979 and 1980. These skins totalled 103 pieces and weighed 250 kg and 151 kg respectively. Although they were described as being C.n. novaeguineae, since the subspecies does not occur in the Philippines, they were most likely in fact C.n. mindorensis, which is in Appendix I of CITES. Customs statistics showed imports from the Philippines consistently occurring from 1979 through 1984, peaking in 1979 at 1749 kg (Figure 51). Correlation with Customs statistics was fairly good in 1980, but poor in every other year. 116 Japan Imports 1800 1,749 74 Dealers ome Diiatama i CUS LUIS re ee MIQS GON Mik” ez BES Sk Figure 51: Total imports by weight of skins from the Philippines Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers'’ data The skins ranged in length from 4 ft to 9 ft (121.9 cm to 274.3 cm) in each year for which there are data from the dealers, with an average of 6 ft (182.9 cm) (Appendix 5). Singapore The dealers reported importing Crocodylus porosus and C. novaeguineae from Singapore, both of which are farmed there although in very limited numbers (Luxmoore et al., 1985). With the exception of 1984, the quantities reported were quite small and therefore in most years did not correlate well with the Customs data. Customs show much larger quantities being imported from Singapore (Figure 52); so either the dealers are identifying the skins by country of origin or a number of dealers who did not cooperate with this study imported skins directly from Singapore. C. novaeguineae skins from Singapore were reported by the dealers only in 1977 and 1978, when 687 kg and 318 kg of wet-salted skins respectively were obtained. These imports totalled 205 skins. The minimum length reported in both years was 10 in (25.4 cm) and the maximum was 18 in (45.7 cm) (Appendix 5). However, these figures were probably misreported and refer to widths not skin lengths. No average was given. Wet salted C. porosus skins were imported in every year except 1981 and 1982. These skins totalled 4195 kg and numbered 1673 pieces and most trade in 1980 was imported via Indonesia. The smallest minimum width reported for the wet-salted pieces was 6 in (15.2 cm) in 1984, and the largest maximum was 38 in (96.5 cm) the same year, both figures derived from a shipment imported via Indonesia. The average width of skins ranged from 14 in to 18 in (35.6 cm to 45.7 cm) (Appendix 6). 117 Japan Imports 6,782 6,952 Dealers (ee!) CUStioNS Figure 52: Total imports by weight from Singapore Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers' data Tanned C. porosus skins were imported in 1982 only. The trade numbered 100 skin pieces and totalled 24 kg. Tanned skins averaged 27 cm in width, with a minimum of 20 cm and a maximum of 40 cm (Appendix 6). The poor correlation of the dealers’ data with Customs statistics (except for 1983 and 1984) and the known use of Singapore as a major entrepot make it impossible to establish an accurate evaluation of the trade. Much of it, however, is believed to have originated in Indonesia, thereby circumventing CITES controls. Solomon Islands A total of 2069 kg of Crocodylus porosus skins from the Solomon Islands was reported by the dealers for 1981 through 1984, peaking in 1983. Customs statistics also show imports of crocodile skins from the Solomon Islands in 1977 (Figure 53). The total reported by the dealers in 1983 was 166 kg above the figure given in the Customs statistics. The trends shown by both sets of data are similar with a high growth period in 1982 and 1983 and followed by a drop in 1984. Correlation with Customs is generally very good indicating that few companies outside of those surveyed were engaged in importation from the Solomon Islands. The minimum width of the skins was 5 in (12.7 cm) in all years except 1981 when it was one inch larger (15.2 cm). Maximum widths rose from 30 in (76.2 cm) in 1981 to 43 in (109.2 cm) in 1984. The average width was 10 in (25.4 cm) in all years except 1982 when it was 14 in (35.6 cm) (Appendix 6). 118 Japan Imports V4 Dealers {| Customs Figure 53: Total imports by weight from the Solomon Islands Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers’ data Thailand Imports of skins from Thailand, involving either Crocodylus siamensis or C. novaeguineae or both, were reported by the dealers from 1978 to 1982 and in 1984. For the purpose of comparison with the Customs data the subtotals for each species were added together. These imports totalled 21679 kg (Figure 54). In 1979, 1325 kg of wet-salted C. novaeguineae, representing 200 skins were imported by the dealers. All other imports were of C. siamensis, and numbered 3104 skins. Correlation between the dealers’ data and those of Customs was overall extremely good, ranging from 83% to 100%, except in 1981 when there was a discrepancy of 60%. The trends exhibited by the two sets of data follow the same pattern with no trade reported in 1977, rising to a peak in 1979, declining to nothing by 1983 and then a renewal of imports in 1984. The wet-salted C. siamensis skins averaged 20 in (50.8 cm) in width in all years except 1984 when it was 21 in (53.3 cm). The minimum and maximum range was consistent at 18 in to 25 in (45.7 cm to 63.5 cm) until 1984 when it was 19 in (48.3 cm) and 26 in (66 cm) (Appendix 6). 119 Japan Imports VA Dealers [_] Customs a Figure 54: Total imports by weight from Thailand Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers' data Other Asia/Oceanian countries Three other Asia/Oceanian countries appeared in the Customs statistics which were not included in the dealers’ data during the period examined. In 1978, imports from Australia, which at the time had banned all exports of crocodilian skins, totalled 715 kg. From Pakistan, a country where the only indigenous crocodile species are the Appendix I Crocodylus palustris and Gavialis gangeticus, 64 kg of skins were received in 1980 (Appendix 1). Taiwan was reported as supplying 330 kg of crocodilian skins in 1984 (Appendix 1). Imports from Taiwan reportedly involve Caiman crocodilus, some of which are possibly ranched there. The ranched animals are thought to be originally from Colombia, according to one dealer. It should also be noted that, at least in 1985, illegal shipments of Caiman skins bound for Taiwan were identified leaving Uruguayan ports (Villalba-Macias, pers. comm.). 120 Japan Imports Africa overview Japan has traditionally not dealt in crocodile skins directly with African countries, the European dealers having a virtual monopoly. The dealers surveyed reported sporadic trading only with Zimbabwe and South Africa and even then in very small quantities. The most commonly available species, Crocodylus niloticus, is not regarded as a suitable substitute for C. porosus, and Japanese dealers consider than demand for middle quality range skins is currently being met by supplies of C. novaeguineae and Alligator mississippiensis. South Africa Dealers reported importing Crocodylus niloticus skins in 1978 when 170 kg, representing 52 wet-salted skins, varying between 30 cm and 40 cm in width, were imported (Appendix 6). Customs data also showed the import of 70 kg of leather in 1977 and 280 kg of skins in 1983, as well as 170 kg in 1978 (Figure 55). ve 280 Dealers [_] Customs 300 K 200 170 g 170 100 70 0 Th doe Cy OUiole YO2'E | OS Baton Year Figure 55: Total imports by weight of crocodilian skins/leather from South Africa Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers’ data Zimbabwe A total of 631 kg of wet-salted Crocodylus niloticus skins were reported by, the dealers in 1981 and 1984. Customs data showed that 470 kg were imported from Zimbabwe in 1981, which is 33 kg less than reported by dealers for that year, and 128 kg in 1984 (Figure 56). The dealers reported that these imports represented 423 skins. 121 Japan Imports C7 Dealers [_] Customs Figure 56: Total imports by weight of crocodilian skins from Zimbabwe Source: Dealers’ data The skins from Zimbabwe ranged in width between 25 cm and 48 cm with an average of 41.6 cm in 1981 and 40.7 cm in 1984 (Appendix 6). Other African countries Two other African nations are reported in the Customs data as suppliers of crocodilian skins to Japan. In 1977, 132 kg were reportedly received from Kenya, and in 1978, 7343 kg were imported from Nigeria (Appendix 1). Neither country was identified in the dealers’ data. Europe overview Although there are no crocodilian species native to Europe, several countries primarily France and Italy, but also Spain, F.R. Germany and Switzerland, have domestic industries engagediin the manufacture of reptile skin products. Although net importers, .European dealers occasionally re-export to Japan. Most trade involves tanned skins usually of Crocodylus niloticus and C. cataphractus, African species not traditionally imported directly from countries of origin to Japan in significant quantities. European countries are also known to have served as laundering points for illegal skin shipments destined for Japan. In recent years, the freeport of Hamburg, F.R. Germany, and Spain before ratification of CITES have been identified as transit points for illegal Shipments of Caiman skins from South America. This traffic, however, is not apparent in either Customs or dealers’ data. 122 Japan Imports France A total of 20 kg in 1977 and 99 kg in 1978 of tanned Crocodylus niloticus skins were imported from France, followed by 104 kg in 1979 and 194 kg in 1980, according to the dealers’ data. The pieces ranged in width from 12 cm to 39 cm, with averages varying between 19.5 cm and 23.5 cm depending on the year (Appendix 6). Tanned pieces of C. cataphractus were also imported from France: 203 kg in 1977, 120 kg in 1978, 445 kg in 1979, and 155 kg in 1980. The width of these pieces ranged between a minimum of 12 cm and a maximum of 35 cm, with averages varying between 19.5 cm and 23.5 cm depending on the year (Appendix 6). Also imported from France were 23 kg of tanned C. porosus pieces in 1978 and 8 kg of C. novaeguineae in 1982. The porosus skins ranged between 25 cm and 40 cm, but overall averaged 30 cm (Appendix 6). The novaeguineae skins were larger, averaging 37 cm in width, and ranging between 30 cm and 50 cm. Customs consistently reported imports of crocodilian leather from France. In some years correlation with the dealers’ data is very good, in others extremely poor (Figure 57), suggesting that the dealers who supplied data were intermittent importers. In no year was the volume reported by Customs substantial (Figure 57). The number of tanned skin pieces imported from France totalled 9491 skins (Figure 58). 1200 Dealers ie [_] Customs 1000 : ie 800 352 K 600 $49 25 g Y 429 400 j 223° 2S YG U, = ol Bi] Z GY Uj 179 —Y\iY\Y\G TE Ter. e Coe SO wee, ees aamnoe Figure 57: Total imports by weight of tanned skins/leather from France Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers’ data 123 Japan Imports ( x l0Opes.) 40, 3,926 ge | Vv, edt hms oti eita AG, cater EC. poros. 30 Be «(C. NOVaE. 20) 10 78 is) 80 81 o2 Year Figure 58: Total number of tanned skin pieces imported from France Source: Dealers’ data Figure 59: Total imports by weight of tanned skins/leather from Italy Source: Japanese Customs statistics/Dealers' data 124 Japan Imports Italy Imports from Italy were only reported by the dealers in two yeers, 1979 and 1980, when 38 kg or 293 skin pieces and 61 kg or 500 skin pieces respectively of tanned Crocodylus niloticus pieces were recorded. Customs data showed imports of crocodilian leather in every year except for 1981, with the largest total of 406 kg in 1982 (Figure 59). Correlation with Customs imports was fair in the years for which there were data from the dealers, 79% in 1979 (only 10 kg difference) and, in 1980 dealers reported 14 kg more from Italy than did Customs. Spain A total of 67 kg or 500 tanned Caiman crocodilus crocodulus skins were reportedly imported by the dealers in 1979, although Customs have no record of any imports from Spain in any year. The minimum width of these pieces was 25 cm, the maximum was 34 cm, and the average was 30 cm. Other European countries In the Customs data, in 1979, both Belgium and Switzerland were reported as exporting 944 kg and 496 kg respectively to Japan. The dealers' data did not include any trade from these countries. pe Dealers [_] Customs 400 300 k 9 200 125 Japan Imports VALUE OF THE TRADE IN RAW CROCODILIAN SKINS Based on Customs statistics, the declared value of raw crocodilian skin imports into Japan ranged from Y710 million (US$2.4 million) in 1977 to Y1.7 billion (US$7.1 million) in 1982 (Figure 60). Overall, a pattern of growth was seen during the period examined, due to a combination of fluctuating but generally favourable market factors. 2000 — TOTAL ——= aw one —- > ASIA/OCE M na See j 1900 Be | i | 1000 0 n ¥) 7200 € n 0 Figure 60: Total value of crocodile skin imports Source: Japanese Customs statistics From 1977 to 1979, the value of the trade rose by 76% reflecting the steady increase in trade volumes which occurred during the period (Figure 60). The average value in yen per kilo appeared to decrease during the period, however, that trend is deceptive. While Customs data for 1978 indicate that the average value per kilo dropped by 11%, in fact, that year the value of the yen to the US dollar, the currency used for virtually all international transactions, increased by 30% (Figure 61). Therefore, if figures are adjusted accordingly, the value in US dollars per kilo for skins actually increased by about 20% that year. The following year, however, the value per kilo dropped slightly. In 1980, market factors experienced a reversal, which may have been partly influenced by Japan's accession to CITES that year. A 44% drop in trade volume was offset by the average value per kilo climbing to the highest level ever in the history of the Japanese industry - Y13 492 (US$59.43) (Figure 61). In 1981, a 13% decline in value per kilo was noted, but total trade volumes increased proportionately. As a result, the overall value of the trade remained constant during these years (Figure 60). 126 Japan Imports 90000 - Average va Me per Kg ¥/$ 50 snr | r rear P / ‘s 15000 + 45 r At x C a a c ii : * / 1 x uy 3 / = 10000 = ae 04 / 0 Y | g 1000 15 n a r 0 Oo. Ll eel Ove in SO 1 OOS OL Year Figure 61: Average value per kilo of crocodile skin imports Source: Japanese Customs statistics The value of the trade increased again in 1982 (Figure 60) when dramatic growth in import volumes (Figure 1) more than compensated for a substantial drop in the average value per kilo (Figure 61). In 1983, despite the highest import volume ever, the total value of the trade decreased by 17% as the average value per kilo fell to the lowest level for the period examined (Figure 61). Despite a 14% of decline in total volume, there was a slight increase in the value of the trade in 1984, the result of an increase in the average value per kilo. When analysed on a regional basis, the value of imports clearly reflects the differences in species composition. Imports from Asia/Oceanian countries, which are known to be largely composed of higher quality and more expensive Crocodylus porosus and C. novaeguineae skins, represent from 4% to 20% more of the trade by total value than by total volume (Figure 62). Conversely, imports from Latin America and the Caribbean, which overwhelmingly involve cheaper Caiman skins, represent from 9% to 21% more by total volume than by total value. Imports of Alligator mississippiensis from the United States annaully ranged from 9% to 13% of the total volume and from 7% to 11% pe the total value of Japanese crocodile skin imports. While the dealers’ data identified both Paraguay and Colombia as trading in Caiman crocodilus skins, analysis of the average value per kilo of skins coming from the two countries was remarkably divergent (Figure 63). Skins from Paraguay showed a madest fluctuation in the average value per kilo. From a low of ¥3853 (US$13.02) in 1977, the average value steadily climbs to a peak of ¥7415 (US$33.86) in 1981, thereafter declining to Y4816 (US$20.32) in 1984. 127 9 1K Japan Imports OES 40) ON Op RYO) S10) G0) etclOl ee SIO Glo) WLI (volume LLL i; Value - 3A 2 |Z AS 1A/0CE OLLI be ele ie | LEELA WM WML Year . —' 8 Willi 8. w LLL u LLB i ae A Rane te le 100 «0 «8 «670 6 80 40 30 20g % Figure 62: Comparative annual value and volume % of total trade from Latin America/Caribbean region and Asia/Oceania region Source: Japanese Customs statistics The average value per kilo of Colombian skins showed a similar trend but a much greater level of growth from 1977 to 1981, followed by a decline. The fact that the average value per kilo of the skins from Colombia was 50% to 230% more than the price for presumably the same species originating from Paraguay is difficult to interpret. 128 Japan Imports a zxodo~z Figure 63: Average value per kilo of imports from Colombia, Netherlands Antilles, and Paraguay ; Source: Japanese Customs statistics The dealers’ data identified Colombian Caiman skins as consistently smaller than those originating From Paraguay. Moreover, the average value per kilo of Colombian skins is equivalent to or substantially more than the value of classic crocodilian skins from Papua New Guinea or Indonesia in most years (Figure 64). This considerable discrepancy could perhaps be explained if imports from Colombia involved skins from the South American classic crocodilians, Crocodylus intermedius and C. acutus or Melanosuchus niger, but certainly the former two species were severely depleted in Colombia and elsewhere when this trade occurred (Groombridge, 1982). Japanese dealers only acknowledged receiving very small quantities of the latter species. Imports of Caiman _crocodilus skins from the Netherlands Antilles, the third major supplier in both Customs and dealers’ data for the period examined, in most years held a middle range between the average value per kilo of Colombian and Paraguayan skins (Figure 63). The one exception was 1980, when the value increased to Y21 674 (US$95.48) per kilo to become the most expensive imports from the region that year. In terms of average length, the dealers’ data reported skins from the Netherlands Antilles as similar in size to those from Colombia, and substantially smaller than those from Paraguay. A similar analysis of the average value per kilo of imports from Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, and Singapore, the major contributors of skins from Asia, shows considerable fluctuation (Figure 64). All of these countries are known to trade primarily the same two species, Crocodylus porosus and C. novaeguineae, although from year to year the species composition and other factors such as size or quality of skins is known to differ. 129 Japan Imports 38000 seractee ---= i Qa xa TD oO — con [op] co) © Tipo apomecO. Olt dee Gar Od Year Figure 64: Average value per kilo of imports from Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, and Singapore Source: Japanese Customs statistics While some dealers mentioned that skins are considerably cheaper when imported from Singapore, as opposed to Indonesia, Customs data reveals the average value per kilo for Singaporean trade to be more expensive than Indonesian imports for all years except 1979 and 1980. Singapore imports ranged in value per kilo from Y12 044 (US$50.82) in 1983 to a remarkable Y¥33 236 (US$134.02) in 1982. In contrast, the Indonesian range per kilo was considerably lower, from Y8254 (US$34.83) in 1983 to Y¥21 079 (US$92.86) in 1980. However, it needs to be remembered that Customs data only refer to the declared value of the skins and do not take into account any additional payments which may be necessary to facilitate shipment of skins out of Indonesia. Furthermore the Customs statistics record country of origin rather than country of consignment. Overall, Fluctuations in the average value per kilo of imports from Papua New Guinea have been less than those for either Indonesia or Singapore. Ranging in value per kilo from Y11 250 (US$47.47) in 1983 to Y18 865 (US$76.07) in 1982, Papua New Guinea skins were from 13% to 41% more valuable per kilo than those from Indonesia in all years except from 1978 through 1980, when Indonesian trade was from 2% to 25% more valuable. It is perhaps significant to note that since Papua New Guinea instituted ranching and established a minimum and maximum size requirement for exports in 1981, her stocks have consistently been more valuable per kilo than imports from Indonesia. Imports from Thailand, which are known to involve mostly farmed Crocodylus_siamensis skins (although the dealers reported some imports of C. novaeguineae in 1979), have been consistently lower in value per kilo than 130 Japan Imports other classic crocodilians imported from Asia/Oceanian countries. The average value per kilo ranged from Y5187 in 1978 to Y¥10 245 in 1982, which compared favourably with the average value per kilo of Alligator mississippiensis skins from the United States (Figure 65). a xmodOoOA< Figure 65: Average value per kilo of imports from Thailand and the United States Source: Japanese Customs statistics The average value per kilo for A. mississippiensis, the only species regularly exported from the USA, ranged from Y5663 (US$22.83) in 1982 to Y10 217 (US$46.65) in 1981, with the exception of 1980 when the value reached Y¥29 449 (US$129.73), which stands as an anomaly and defies interpretation (Figure 65). While the value per kilo for skins for this species and C. siamensis are within the range of that for inferior quality Caiman skins, it needs to be remembered that there are substantially more Caiman skins to the kilo than either of these classic crocodilian species. The total value of the trade is expected to remain stable or grow even further, even in the face of a decline in import volumes. Even if cheaper Caiman skins become increasingly more difficult to obtain, it is likely that more costly classic crocodilian skins will assume an even greater share of total imports, thereby keeping the total value of the trade high. 131 Japan Imports DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS After a period of expansion, Japan's crocodile industry is currently in a state of uncertainty. According to some dealers, the fashion in Japan for alligator and crocodile skin products peaked between 1983 and 1985 and the demand is now tapering off. At the same cime, expensive European luxury products remain highly competitive in the brand-oriented Japanese market, a fact which obviously cuts into domestic sales. The rush to stockpile skins from 1983 onward has further given rise to severe cash flow problems for some companies. These factors, combined with growing difficulties in getting skins, particularly cheaper Caiman skins from South America, could cause increasingly serious problems for the industry. More than any other species, Crocodylus porosus holds great psychological importance for the Japanese’ industry. Accordingly, it was the only crocodilian species singled out by the industry for a reservation under CITES. Although skins are annually available, supplies are by no means limitless. Most wild stocks have been depleted (Groombridge, 1982) and ranching/farming operations do not yet generate sufficient quantities of skins for the trade. While the situation in Papua New Guinea remains stable enough, in Indonesia, where the problems of enforcing export controls are immense, the future is far less predictable, with over-exploitation of accessible stocks a serious possibility if the recent initiative to develop a management programme fails. The anticipated entry into trade of ranched Australian skins in late 1986 could compensate for any decline in supplies from Indonesia, but, according to CITES Regulations, in order for Japan to be eligible for trade in ranched specimens, the reservation on C. porosus will have to be dropped. Increasingly, Papua New Guinea is seen as an example to be emulated and promoted elsewhere by dealers who see government-controlled programmes as a means to ensure long-term supplies of quality skins.. Accordingly, the 15% greater cost dealers are now paying for Papua New Guinea C. porosus and C. novaeguineae skins is justified by the better quality skins which are produced, the reliability of delivery, and the legality of the skins in the USA, if necessary. Indeed, it is encouraging to note that the Japanese importers are taking a leading role in the development of ranching/farming activities in the Philippines. C. niloticus is now more accessible to Japanese importers in the wake of EEC regulations which have the effect of limiting imports into the Community (notable France and Italy), the establishment of export quotas in connection with downlisting of populations to Appendix II in many African countries, and, most recently, the extremely favourable exchange rate for yen in relation to the US dollar. These factors will probably stimulate some direct importation from Africa, but this trade will probably never replace the reliance on C. porosus as the prefered species in Japan. Likewise, A. mississippiensis is popular for its combination of greater length relative to belly width with quality of skin. However, the preference for C. porosus still applies and A. mississippiensis is not regarded as a substitute. While import: levels May cise somewhat, in general it would appear that current levels are at about market capacity, according to Japanese dealers. The most serious problem for the dealers in the long run is the availability of Caiman. skins. The Japanese market is dependent upon large-scale imports of Caiman skins to supply a public demand for low-priced products. The effect -of CITES controls in the reduction or elimination of some sources of skins could force some smaller companies to go bankrupt. Nor is Caiman ranching or farming seen as a viable alternative since the inherent 132 Japan Imports increase in cost would price the skins above the market level which they currently supply. However, the situation in Venezuela where Caiman management is being promoted, is being closely watched and could offer substantial future supplies. The problems of the industry are exacerbated by systems of payment in some of the exporting countries. C. novaeguineae skins imported directly from Indonesia cost approximately $3.00 more per inch than similar skins obtained Via Singapore, owing to the difficulties in obtaining bureaucratic approval for the shipment. Furthermore, in many cases, delivery of skins is dependent upon systematic visits and continual maintenance of relations in Indonesia which are expensive. For many small Japanese companies it is much simpler and more economical to import from Singapore; the skins are cheaper and often require only a telephone call to be otbained. Political instability and commercial unpredictability are also serious problems in South America. While the trade has undoubtedly taken advantage of the opportunities created by the lack of enforced controls, it is also true that such factors increase the difficulties of obtaining legal skins. Japanese commercial interests have also taken an interest in conservation plans in the region. For example, a plan to fund the establishment of a central management station in Colombia or Paraguay which would carry out biological research, monitor populations and regulate exports under government control is being seriously discussed within the industry. Because Japan plays such an important role in the world trade in crocodilian skins, insight into Japanese market patterns and other factors governing her trade is essential for sound management policies to be developed worldwide. The data supplied by the Japanese dealers provide the first independent confirmation of the validity of the Japanese Customs statistics, and they give invaluable information on the size of skins in trade, which was previously not available. They also help to highlight where there are problems of enforcing protective legislation as well as the problems, from the dealers' perspective, of obtaining reliable and legal supplies. If the Situation is to improve in both conservation and commercial terms, enforcement of controls must be made more secure in importing and exporting countries so that skins are only obtained from exploitable populations, which will, in turn, help to ensure continuity and reliability of supply. 133 Japan Imports REFERENCES Donadio, Alberto (1982). Wildlife Legislation and Enforcement in Colombia. TRAFFIC(USA) Newsletter, 4(3 & 4). Fuchs, K.H.P. (1975). The chemistry and technology of novelty leathers. Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, Italy. Groombridge, B. (1982). The IUCN Amphibia - Reptilia Red Data Book. Part I Testudines, Crocodylia, Rhynchocephalia. IUCN: Gland, Switzerland. Hemley, G. and Caldwell, J. (1986). The crocodile skin trade since 1979. Crocodiles. Proceedings of the 7th Working Meeting of the IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group, Caracas, Venezuela, 1984. International Union for Conservation of Nature and _ Natural Resources, Gland, Switzerland. Pp 398-412. Luxmoore, R.A., Barzdo, J.G., Broad, S.R. and Jones, D.A. (1985). A Directory of Crocodilian Farming Operations. IUCN: Gland, Switzerland. Personal communication Brian Groombridge, Species Conservation Monitoring Unit, IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre. Juan S. Villalba-Macias, Director, TRAFFIC(South America) Richard Luxmoore, Wildlife Trade Monitoring Unit, IUCN Conservation Monitoring Centre Wayne King, Chairman, IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group Phil Hall, IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group 134 Japan Imports Ge eA eS a er ec eee fete n aes‘se | uso‘zt_ | 6os'9 | 096 —_foor'r [acer | zee = gvo't | zeste [sects [zezte | oan | 166'06 | sze't_ | ezs'9 foup'z | 16 ver | vere [essa | pra'p ei9'z [eostor |sez'z |etz'zt joes: |usr'2 |pso'e | os | oub‘z9t | too's | toe‘st | ore'zt | z2e'tz | buz‘pt | ore‘oe | zog‘zt | 1ie‘ot ue [iss —[osg'z_ lossy |[eces |sce'e |ze'o | oa | sov'ie' |ese'a | teztee | zuv‘e | eve'et | zzz‘st |vssts |oup'z [erste [tec's [eves |ecv's |zeo's [eset |zoi'e [eset [se flow | a | erueaag/eTsy ucg*asz'1 | ezz'ez | ssc‘ zo1 | 9n9'ezt | zez‘v9t | oon‘vet | oss'us [ooz'ts |ecz't2i | zzt‘ez | otv‘es | ize" 968 ge9 Sbbit re ike 1s9‘1 618 0z2'z 029 ose'z osz'z gee 'z Seaeilt 1e6‘2 | spa'z | 982 110'6 eee iat lS 6] boe ‘ol 2e8's oLb‘b b22'2 080'T SeL'sl | SL6‘b 9s9' le 028' 62 909‘ T LE6‘8b oss 16h‘ 969 ees‘gz | osp'zi | gzo'est | gus‘eet | asster | ops'se [eve'zs [esz'zy | vrs'sz | | | L61'8 60e‘Ib | 2zS‘b9 | Z9T‘e8 | bIB8*bs je1O] veaqqtsej/eoysowy ut1e7 LS2 oo i) 682‘ 12 8b6'2 SSI‘9 spe‘zz | 6zz‘9t | gtI‘9 bee 4 6L0'2 189'62 Heed ea i 68b'6 GLI‘ 9b 689'9 o 2 ] zr ° i GS = ce = N : = Ob6'6L ueaqq}ie)/eofsomy UtIe] 810] eotsemy yiJON BoTJaBy YON ea AR MeeRe es see (3: 11uUp) SOTISTIEIS suojsng sseueder/9g6l ATUL OF OLG6L wory SUTYS TOJIeHIT[W pue eTtTpoos0rIg jo sqaoduy esoueder :1 xtpueddy 135 Japan Imports Je10y pues cE ee oe ie | ee eas Gia) EE ad | | ——— ye10] edoung bre 780'T Se 3 f aaa ares cag‘st [oez's [euv'2 [eat or | (Dries =| (nn Sr oa tenis ire [cee = Teoy BoIsyy F beL ert | sbs 821 out arte | ae | | Penee | Pace | he ObZ‘T 968 ue Pee lee eer a Ea LI8‘€ O8€ COLL c89'b BLb'2 zheape elas = ‘= = Sy BOTY ozpzis [our‘or | 9vo'ee [esz'as |ore'zy | ovttee [t9e've | ezo'oe [ese'ue [eze'ee | eez‘zz | vis'ot | zzz‘o1 [oue'zt | sve'92 | zee'et |eos'ht | sio‘st | [P10] etueasg/ersy LLE SIL a} alin oe ao oO bak wal ee on gov'e [ozs foss |vrs | ize igt | ssz paee |p cel os uss‘é | bov't [eza'z | ore ead Ua 680'6 Ge bs 661 voz [ese |vo9 [vor |[zto [soe [ies |agstz | eso Hd erueaog/ersy { Asqunoy basi £96 286 1861 O86I 661 8l6I LL61 9161 SL6I bl6l e161 261 TL61 OL6I feo SdT1ST1¥1S swOJsN) : 9d1NO0S SUTYS JOILZT{[Y pue eT tpovo0s9 jo sisodwy asoueder (*Juos) | xTpueddy 136 Appendix 1, Contd. Key to country codes PRPRPASAPYBSSSESNSR ESS SERA SRSA RAH ERS Netherlands Antilles Argentina Australia Belgium Bolivia Brazil Switzerland Ivory Coast Colombia Federal Republic of Germany German Democratic Republic Denmark Egypt Spain France United Kingdom French Guiana Guyana Hong Kong Honduras Indonesia Italy Kenya Madagascar Mexico Malaysia Mozambique Nigeria Nicaragua Netherlands Panama Pacific Islands Peru Papua New Guinea Philippines Pakistan Puerto Rico Paraguay Panama Canal Zone Solomon Islands Sudan Sweden Singapore Suriname El Salvador Thailand Taiwan United States of America Venezuela South Africa Zambia Zimbabwe Japan Imports 137 ———— *XeW :JOAR : UID i if “XeW :UOAe UIW Wodxa Jo AJjuNOD Base J0/3 WiBiJo Jo Ayjunosdy “xeu JOA UIW | “XeW Fe “XBW: JOA f “xew : Jane Ulm | “xew : ; Pdoae -UlW | “xeW: Jone Sula "Xeu : SOAR | UI Xe JaAe Ul | “Ke “JOAR Pui Jone Ul JOAe *JOAR : Xow: Jone: Uj parjes yam (XE) AV UENDS) >S4A10ddS Japan Imports 138 wiOg eTTeuuOTASENDH Asarans , STeTeoq :Z@ XTpueddy Japan Imports Appendix 3. Dealers' data: Weight and number of skins, compiled by species W - Wet-salted D - Dry-salted T - Tanned Country/ Species 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 A.mississip. W No = - - - 2790 5448 6508 4370 kg - - - ~ 9182 19606 24387 18327 A.mississip. T No = - = = = = = 246 kg = = = - - - - 167 A.mississip. Total Neo - - - - 2790 5448 6508 4616 kg - - - - 9182 19606 24387 18492 C.c.crocodilus D No 70733 97461 180357 128352 117878 144969 190242 186790 kg 7144 20079 35319 27350 32348 62733 77137 84882 C.c.crocodilus T No 2700 12880 106073 52295 57609 3200 - - kg 315 1633 11664 6291 8223 470 - - C.c.crocodilus W No - - - 2000 4750 18500 4000 5000 kg - - - 878 350 11449 2095 275 C.c.yacare W No - 11887 7200 500 28281 59606 5/7500 31160 kg - 8915 576 40 2281 4769 4600 2493 C. crocodilus Total No 73433 119513 293630 183147 208518 226275 251742 222950 kg 7459 30627 47558 34559 43202 79421 83832 87650 M. niger T No 152 - - = = = = = kg 20 = = 8 = z z 2 M. niger D No - 516 - - = = = is kg = 806 = 2 = x b - M. niger Total No 152 516 - = = = = = kg 20 806 - - = = aS a C. cataphractus T No 1350 800 2967 1031 - = = = kg 203 120 445 155 - - = = C. niloticus T No 250 901 1252 1665 = z = s kg 20 99 142 255 = = 2 cs C. niloticus W No - 52 - - 313 - - 110 kg - 170 - - 503 - - 128 C. niloticus Total No 250 953 1252 1665 313 - - 110 kg 20 269 142 255 503 - - 128 139 Japan Imports Appendix 3, Contd. ee eee eee eee eee eee ————————— Country/ Species 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 C.n.novaeguineae T No - 50 613 - - 18 - kg - 16 65 = = 8 = C.n.novaeguineae W No 5766 10019 11865 11279 9600 8701 9195 12562 kg 4721 10339 15463 11907 13428 9305 15165 23214 C.novaeguin. Total No 5766 10069 12478 11279 9600 8719 9195 12562 kg 4721 10355 15529 11907 13428 9313 15165 23214 C. porosus T No - 50 - - - 100 - - kg - 23 - - - 24 - C. porosus W No 1473 4390 5828 4775 3659 2553 3209 6050 kg 1291 3925 5946 4172 47632 2262 4325 9755 C. porosus Total W No 1473 4440 5828 4775 3659 2653 3209 6050 kg 1291 3948 5946 4172 47632 2286 4325 9755 C. siamensis W No - 600 604 700 200 200 - 800 kg - 4576 3690 4008 1173 1265 - 5642 Grand Total No 82424 136891 316759 202597 225080 243295 270654 247088 kg 13714 50701 73310 55056 72251 112191 127709 144883 140 Japan Imports Appendix 4. Dealers’ data: Weight and number of skins, compiled by countries of origin. W - Wet-salted D- ODry-salted T - Tanned Country/ Species TO77N LOT SU 1979) LOR ONTOS IN ALOR DEO Sommealoas Argentina C.c.crocodilus T No - - 3333 - - - = - kg 2 s 168 = = = = Bolivia C.c.crocodilus T No 1200 6180 27240 12858 14889 2000 - - kg 95 611 1801 1065 1530 260 - - Colombia C.c.crocodilus W No - - - = 4750 = - 5000 kg - - - - 350 - = 275 C.c.crocodilus D No 69733 61981 72456 82705 51000 28000 55000 26010 kg 5444 6435 6916 7700 3280 2690 4750 2105 France C.cataphractus T No 1350 800 2967 1031 - - = - kg 203 120 445 155 - = = = C. niloticus T No 250 901 959 1165 = = = = kg 20 99 104 194 = s = S C. porosus T No - 50 - = - = a4 2 kg - 23 - = = = a ea C.n.novaeguineae T No - = = = = 18 2 =, kg - - - - - 8 = = France Total T No 1600 1751 3926 2196 - 18 - - kg 223 242 549 349 - 8 = a Indonesia C.n.novaeguineae W No 518 669 684 434 1581 435 - = kg 388 501 506 321 1170 322 - - C. porosus W No 78 1121 1793 359 839 207 310 509 kg 59 841 1345 269 629 155 232 381 via Singapore C.n.novaeguineae W No - - 292 79 99 310 832 2856 kg - - 70 35 140 536 2781 9940 C. porosus W No - - 27 829 231 - - 893 kg - - 198 105 739 - - 3206 Indonesia Total W No 596 1790 2796 1701 2750 952 1142 4258 kg 447 1342 2119 730 2678 1013 3013 13527 Italy C. niloticus T No - - 293 500 = = = ae kg = = 38 61 = a = 141 Japan Imports Appendix 4, Contd. oe Dh ei oh Ct oa Sa ee ee ee ee SS ee SS Country/ Species 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 ea a) eo ee ee SS SS SE Ee Malaysia C. porosus W No - - - - - 100 - 200 kg - - = - - 250 - 150 via Singapore C. porosus W No - - 50 100 71 - - - kg - - 250 400 88 3 = iw Malaysia Total W No - = 50 100 71 100 - 200 kg - - 250 400 88 250 - 150 Netherlands Antilles C.c. crocodilus D No - 9128 84551 18125 - - - = kg - 450 15235 1080 - - - - Palau C. porosus W No - 58 96 - = = ze = kg - 191 n.d. = - 2 = = Panama, via F.R. Germany C.c. crocodilus T No - - - 1645 = = = = kg - - - 230 - - = = Papua New Guinea C.n.novaeguineae W No 5108 9285 9504 10348 6667 7635 8237 9579 kg 3646 9520 10556 10412 8874 7945 12005 12882 C. porosus W No 1278 3094 3328 3217 2215 2062 2127 3436 kg 968 2629 2770 2708 2497 1145 2246 3525 via France C.n.novaeguineae T No - - 613 - - - - - kg - - 65 - - - - - via Hong Kong C.n.novaeguineae T No - 50 - - - - - - kg - 16 - - - - - - via Singapore C.n.novaeguineae W No - - 1120 380 1253 321 126 127 kg - - 2756 988 3244 802 379 392 C. porosus W No - - 275 - 266 - 136 - kg - - 773 - 738 - 688 - PNG Total W No 6386 12379 14227 13945 10401 10018 10626 13142 kg 4614 12149 16855 14108 15353 9892 15318 16799 PNG Total T No - 50 613 - - - = - kg - 16 65 = = = & a 142 Japan Imports Appendix 4, Contd. Country/ Species 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Paraguay C.c. crocodilus W No - - - 2000 - 18500 4000 - kg - = - 878 - 11449 2095 - C.c. crocodilus D No 1000 13058 23350 27522 66878 116969 108242 160780 kg 1700 10949 13168 18570 29068 60043 56952 82777 C.c. crocodilus T No 1500 6700 75000 37792 42720 1200 - - kg 220 1022 9628 4996 6693 210 - - C.c. yacare W No - 11887 7200 500 28281 59606 57500 31160 kg - 8915 576 40 2281 4769 4600 2493 via Argentina C.c. crocodilus D No - - - - - - 24000 - kg = = = = 2 - 13850 2 via Hong Kong M. niger T No 152 - - - - - - - kg 20 _ s = = = = = via Uruguay C.c. crocodilus D No - - - - - - 3000 - kg - - - - - - 1585 - Paraguay Total W No - 11887 7200 2500 28281 78106 61500 31160 kg - 8915 576 918 2281 16218 6695 2493 Paraguay Total D No 1000 13058 23350 27522 66878 116969 135242 160780 kg 1700 10949 13168 18570 29068 60043 72387 82777 Paraguay Total T No 1652 6700 175000 37792 42720 1200 - - kg 240 1022 9628 4996 6693 210 - - Peru C.c. crocodilus D No - 10000 - = = = = = kg -- 1445 = = = = = - Philippines C.n.novaeguineae W No - - 65 38 = = = = kg - - 250 151 - = = = Singapore C.n.novaeguineae W No 140 65 - - - = - = kg 687 318 - - = = = Bs C. porosus W No 117 117 259 70 - - 50 220 kg 264 264 610 190 - - 122 445 C. porosus T No - - - - - 100 - = kg = - - - - 24 - - via Indonesia C. porosus W No - - - 200 - - - 640 kg - - - 500 - - - 1800 Singapore Total W No 257 182 259 270 - 100 50 860 kg 951 582 610 690 - 24 122 2245 Japan Imports Appendix 4, Contd. Country/ Species Solomon Islands C. porosus South Africa C. niloticus Spain C.c. crocodilus Suriname, via France M. niger Thailand C.n.novaeguineae C. siamensis Total USA A.mississip. via France A.mississip. A.mississip. USA Total USA Total Venezuela C.c. crocodilus Zimbabwe C. niloticus Grand Total 144 T D W W No kg No kg No kg No kg No kg No kg No ° kg No kg No kg No kg No kg No kg No kg No kg No kg 1977 82424 13714 1978 136891 50701 1979 316759 73310 1980 202597 55056 1981 1982 37 184 72 712 200 200 1173 1265 200 200 1173 1265 2790 5448 9182 19606 2790 5448 9182 19606 313 - 503 - 225080 243295 72251 112191 1983 1984 586 152 1037 248 - 800 - 5642 - 800 - 5642 6508 4310 - 110 - 128 270654 247088 127709 144883 Japan Imports Appendix 5. Dealers' data: Size of skins by length (cm) * probably width declared by mistake ee ee ee eee eee eS ee Species/Country 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 SE ee a Se SS ee a ee ee eee ee C.c. crocodilus Argentina max = 270 = = 2 FS = av = = 150 - - - = min z = 100 = = 2 2 = Bolivia max 230 230 230 230 230 230 - - av 160 156.5 151.4 152.4 152.4 160 - - Colombia max pi Sec ee i eee ee a 127 109.2 81.3 81.3 96.5 av 61.2 52.8 56.9 Daeé 49.8 60.2 57.9 52.1 min 40.6 40.6 40.6 40.6 40.6 40.6 40.6 40.6 Neth. Antilles max - 73.7 99.1 81.3 - = = = av 537-3 63.5 50.8 - - - - min - 45.7 45.7 45.7 - et = = Panama via FRG max - - - 270 = -- - - av - - - 150 - - - ~ min - - - 115 - = - = Paraguay (R+T) max 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 av 162 100.8 137.5 168.6 166.4 164 171.1 168.4 min 100 65 90 100 55 70 100 80 Paraguay max - - - - - - 270 - via Argentina av - - - - - - 180 = min - - - - - - 115 = Paraguay max - - - - = =o io) e via Uruguay av - ~ - - - - 150 = min - - - - - = 120 = Peru max - 99.1 - - = = = pe av - 66.0 - - = = = = min - 53.3 - - = = = as Venezuela max - 270 - - - = = = av - - - - - - - - min - 180 - - = = = S C.c. yacare Paraguay max - 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 av - 205.8 162.2 165.4 168.9 198.4 199.8 188.0 min - 115 135 135 150 150 150 115 145 Japan Imports Appendix 5, Contd. Species/Country 1977 1978 1979 C.n. novaeguineae Philippines max - = 274. av - - 182. min - - 121. Singapore max 45.7% 45.7* - av - = = min 25.4% 25.4* - C. porosus Singapore max 45.7% 45.7% 45. av - = = min 25.4% 25.4% 25. A. mississippiensis USA max = 2 = av = = = min = = a USA via France max _ 2 is av = a & min = = z: M. niger Suriname max = 182.9 s via France av - 152.4 - min - 121.9 - 146 7* 4x 1980 OW 1981 1982 1983 NR 1984 NS oO Japan Imports Appendix 6. Dealers' data: Size of skins by width (cm) T - tanned skin R - raw skin SE ee ee ee Species/Country 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 ———————————————————————————EEEeEeEeeeeeeeeeeESSSEeSSESEeeSESeEeSeSEese C.c. crocodilus Neth Antilles max - 73.7 99.1 S13 - - - = av - SBS 63.5 50.8 - - - - min = 45.7 45.7 45.7 = = - - Spain max - - 34 T - = = = = av - — 30 T - - - - - min - - 2501 - - = - - C.c. yacare Paraguay max - 200 125 125 125 149 149 125 av - 112.1 98.3 99.3 87.8 100.3 102.8 96.8 min - 50 65 65 50 75 75 65 C.n. novaeguineae France max - - - = = SO T = = av - - - - - 37 T - - min - - - = = 30 T = by Indonesia max 45.7 50.8 38.1 83.8 58.4 63.5 - - av 3379 32.3 26.9 39.6 36.6 38.1 - - min 10.2 15.2 17.8 25.4 22.9 25.4 - = Indonesia max - - 22.9 45.7 55.9 66 26.2 88.9 via Singapore av - - 17.8 33.0 38.1 41.9 44.5 41.9 min - - 15.2 25.4 25.4 25.4 25.4 Sez PNG max 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 av 20.3 22.9 22.9 22.4 25.4 26.4 28.2 27.7 min 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 17.8 17.8 17.8 PNG via France max - - 13a ets = = = - = av - - 61 T - - = = = min - - Syjqal $e os - = = = PNG via Hong Kong max - 45.7 T - - = = = = av - 38.1T - - - - = = min - -30.5 T - - - - - - PNG via Singapore max - - 88.9 - 58.4 61 71.1 76.2 av - - 30.5 - 25.4 25.4 22.9 40.6 min - - Sn2 - 15.2 15.2 US2 25.4 Thailand max - - 63.5 - = = a = av - - 50.8 - - - - - min - - 43.2 - - - - - 147 Japan Imports Appendix 6, Contd. Species/Country 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 C. porosus France max - 40 T - - = = = = av - 3051 - - - = - = min - 25er - - - = = = Indonesia max 86.4 81.3 114.3 58.4 50.8 96.5 114.3 119.4 av 46.4 41.5 44.4 44.2 33 40.6 47.4 48.8 min 30.5 22.9 25.4 25.4 22.9 17.8 22.9 30.5 Indonesia max - - 101.6 22.9 66 - ~ 86.4 via Singapore av - - 63.5 17.8 54.4 - - 41.7 min - - 50.8 15.2 25.4 - - 25.4 Malaysia max - - - - = 101.6 - 73.7 av = s = = - 57.2 - 63. min - - - - 50.8 - 53.3 Malaysia max - - 58.4 58.4 48.3 = = = via Singapore av - - 50.8 53.3 35.6 - - = min - - 43 48.3 25.4 - - = Palau max - 61 - - - - - - av - 38.1 40.6 - - = = = min - 10.2 - - - - - - PNG max 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 50.8 av 17.8 20.3 20.3 20.6 25.4 23.9 27.9 27.4 min 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 17.8 17.8 PNG via Singapore max - - 88.9 - 58.4 - 63.5 - av - 27.9 - 25.4 - 35.6 - min - - 15.2 - SierZ - 15.2 - Singapore max - tt - 50.8 - 40 T 58.4 58.4 av - - - 35.6 - 27 T 45.7 43.2 min - - - 25.4 - 20 T 40 15.2 Singapore max - - - 63.5 - - - 96.5 via Indonesia av - - - 45.7 - - - 35.6 min - - - 27.9 - - - 15.2 Solomon Is. max - - - - 76.2 81.3 94 109.2 av - - - - 25.4 35.6 25.4 25.4 min - - - - 15.2 12.7 12-7) Sl2m7 A. mississippiensis USA via France max - - - - = = - 76 av - - - - - - - 48 min - = = = = = = = 340 148 Appendix 6, Contd. Species/Country C. siamensis Thailand C. niloticus France Italy South Africa Zimbabwe C. cataphractus France M. niger Paraguay via Hong Kong max av min max av min max av min max av min max av min max av min max av min 1977 31 25 1978 1979 1980 6375 63i55 63 50.8 50.8 50. 45.7 45.7 45 T 29 T 30 T 30 eT PN ey ay 728) 38 24 oT ISy Be IS) 2b 15 - 24 T 24 - 20 T 20 - abby y¢ 15 40 - = 34 = = 30 = = T 35 T 24 T 35 of} Ye 7IOS SP ae) by ae Zab T 72 ee ee 15 T = = = T ps = = T = = = HEH 1981 50.8 45. Japan Imports 1982 1983 1984 63.5 ss 66 50.8 3 53.3 45.7 : 48.3 = = 48 = ~ 40.7 3 = 25 Japan Imports Appendix 7. Dealers' data: Average weight of skins by species and countries (g) W - wet salted D - dry salted T - tanned Le oe pee hs DS Species/Country 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 C.c. crocodilus Argentina Tr - - 50 - - - = Bolivia ap 79 99 66 83 103 130 - - Colombia W - = = = 74 a = 55 D 78 104 96 93 64 96 86 81 Neth Antilles D - 49 180 60 - - - - Panama/ FR Germany T - - - 140 - - - - Paraguay W - - - 439 - 619 524 - D 1700 838 564 675 435 Si) 526 515 T 147 152 128 132 157 175 - - Paraguay/ Argentina D - - - - - - 577 = Paraguay/ Uruguay D - - - - - - 528 - Peru D - 144 - - - - - - C. c. yacare Paraguay W - 750 80 ? 80 ? 80 ? 81 ? 80 ? 80 ? C. n. novaeguineae France T - - - = - 444 = = Indonesia W 750 750 740 740 740 740 - - Indonesia/ Singapore W - - 240 443 1414 1729 3342 3480 PNG W 714 1025 1111 1006 1331 1041 1457 1335 PNG/ H Kong T = 320 a = B 2 2 2 PNG/ Singapore W - - 2461 2600 2589 2498 3008 3087 PNG/ France T - - 106 = = = = = Philippines W - - 3846 3974 = = 2\n. ~ Singapore Ww 4907 4892 - = - = = = Thailand W - - 6625 = = = ut = C. porosus France T - 460 - = = a = a Indonesia W 750 749 750 750 750 750 750 750 Indonesia/ Singapore W - - 7333 127 3199 - - 3590 Malaysia W - - - - - 2500 - 750 Malaysia/ Singapore W - - 5000 4000 1239 - - - Palau W - 3293 - = = d = ~ PNG W 757 850 832 842 1127 556 1056 1026 PNG/ Singapore W - - 2811 - 2774 - 5059 - Singapore W 2256 2256 2355 2714 - - 2440 2023 Singapore/ Indonesia W - - - 2500 = = = 2813 Solomon Is. W - - - - 1946 3870 1770 1632 A. mississippiensis USA W - - - - 3291 3599 3747 4097 USA/ France W - - - - - - - 11167 T = - = = - = - 679 150 Japan Imports Appendix 7, Contd. Species/Country 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 C. siamensis Thailand France Italy South Africa Zimbabwe - 7627 6109 5726 5865 6325 - 7053 80 110 108 166 - = - - = = - - 1607 - - 1164 ZEHHE | \ a (es) oO r iS) IN) C. cataphractus France T 150 150 150 150 - - - - M. niger Paraguay/ H Kong ay 132 - Suriname/ France D - 1562 - = S = = = 151 Japan Imports IMBVESWIZ = MZ VIAWYUZ WZ YOLINAY HINOS YZ NMONHNN AXLNNOD XX YVIANZANAA ANA S3LVLS GALINA SN SO JONIAONd “NYMTVL ML QNYTIVHL HL YyOaqUATYS 13° AS AYOdVONIS OS AunoVad Ad YININD MAN YUNdYd Od VWUNYd Ud SONVIYSHLIN IN YVINSDIN ON VISAVIUW AW GASN SAGOD AYLANOD °O°S'T JO XAQNT NY¥d¥L OL LAOdWI ODIXAW AWALT. YISANOONT. ONON-ONOH YNYAND WOGONIN Q3LINN SAONvAA NTVdS JO OT1anday WAsdss ‘ANYWHAD OTTVANdAY OTLYYOOWAG NYWYSD : ¥IAWOT109 QNY1VEI7I.IMS OONNOD YaUNYD UIAI10€ YTALSnY UNILNADNY PE6L-LL6L eReq JaOdSey [TeNnuUY SALID :g xtpueddy XW , AT ay. MH AD na) ad $3 3a ag 09 HO 9 A) on a ay 152 Japan Imports Od snsouod sn{Aposo9 seaupnbaenou aeautnbaenou sntAposoig SUTAS 9671 SUTHS THOL Od IT XTANIdd¥ eS SS — ee aa ea a (3SOduNd) G3J)NOdsy (3sodund) GALNOdAN ~- NIOTYNO JNOdAKA S.LYOdX3—-3Y/S.LYOdXA SJ.NOdWI 4O AYLNNOD SALDAdS T'I/LL/dL£ NU¥d¥C£ OL LYOdWI LL61 (°3uU09) g xtTpusddy Japan Imports (9) surys (9) suzys SUT ys SUT¥S Qy'bs SUT YS sup ys SUTYS 6SbT 7629 0S 0002 099 2G EZE (9d) [Ad] [xx] C11] sn snsouod sn{fhposouy seeutnbaenou seeurNbeenou sntAposo0u9 aesutnNbeenou sn{Aposog SN[TPOI0UD sN{ Fpos0us uewpe) TI XTANAddY s~tsuerddyssyrsszw uozeby TTY I XTQN3ddv a ee ee ee ee (ASOdYNd) GILYOdAY S14OdX3-J4/SLYOdXA T'I/82/d£ (3s0dund) GALYOdAN NINTNO AYOdxA SLYOdWIE 10 AXLNNOD EE I EE NYd¥L OL. LYOdWT. (*3u05) g xtpueddy SAIOAdS Japan Imports (4SOduNd) GA.LwNOday SLYOdXI-3Y/SLYOdXI T'I/62/d£ (Ss) uFys (Dd) sutys (Ss) ups (d) utys (9) sufpys uTys T Od ; 608T 9d snsouod sn{Apooouy T Nd T Sd 9LOET 5d aeautnbaenou seautnbeenou sn{ Aposo0u I a) BueoeA ENT Fpos0us uewTye) TX XTONAddY (ASOdNNd) OALNOdAu WIOTYO AMOdxA SIMOdWE JO AYLNNOD S$3ID3adS NUd¥L OL LYOdWI 6261 (°3u05) g xtTpueddy Japan Imports SUES OT (xx] aa SUES HOE [xx] HO aeautnbaenocu seoutnbeenou sn Apoosouy SUTYS Z SUTYS ZGT [xx] AI snynoe sn[Aposou9 SUTNS tT ar ‘dds sept] Apooso0uy SUTYS TZL Uxx] LT SUTHS OF Cad] JI sueoeh BN{ Tpos0u9 uewTe) (2) sut1s COVE Kose} Ud SUTNS AY Uxx] AT BUTS Z [xx] 3a SUTHS OT [oo] aa SNoOsNy SN Tpos0us uewTe) (9) SUEys O00Z CAd] sn SuUTy¥s8 OOSOT [xx] 9s SUTYS EYOT Cxx] AT. BUTS 67G Coo] II SUTAS 49 SUTS GG [xx] an SUTYS GOZ Xx] ad SUTHS OT [xx] HD BUTY8 BGZZI [xx] og 8N[TFPpO90UD sSNTFpoOI0UuD uewpeED BUTS BOYOUT O/8Z (xx] 9S SUES OZT [xx] 9S ‘dds yrTAqdoo0Nd II XIQNAddY BUTS EZ [9s] TE) snsouod sn{fkpos0up SUTXS GG6E [xx] a) BsNIFAOT FU snNTAposouy SUT}S OG [99] AI snqzoeuyde,es sn Apos0u9 SUTYS 6ZT [wz] ud ‘dds sept {Aposou9 I XTQNIdd¥ (3sOduNnd) GALYoOday (asodynd) aaLvoday NT9OTNO LYOdXA SLYOdX3A—-3N/SLYOdX9 SLYOdWL 4O AYLNNOD $3193dS T° I/08/dL NYdYL OL LYOdWI +(°}U0D) g xTpueddy O86t 156 Japan Imports SUTHS SBYOUT LERT Cxx] 9S SUTY8 6OZT Cxx] 9s SUTAS 7767 [xx] d SUTAS BIZ Cxx] LT SUTHS ZOT (xx] 113) SUTYS EGZ [xx] ad eeautnbeenou seautnbaenou sn[Apos0u9 IT. XTON3ddv ao Tt) Ls... ee (3S0d4Nd) GaLyodaYy (380duNd) GALYOday NIDTYO LYOdXAa SLYOdX3—-3Y/S.LYOdXA SLYOdWI 4O AYLNNOD SALID3dS ORAS Sd Z°I/08/dc NYd¥L OL LYOdWI ONG6T ("Juo5) g x Tpueddy Japan Imports (9) sufyys sayouy steer 9S (D9) SUTXS /ZLE 9S (D9) Sutys HOLT Dd (9) sutTys OS AW (9) surys g al (9) Ups T [9d] 30 (9) supys g xa ‘dds aeprTApos0.5 (9) Suzys ZT Can] mH (9) supys & [xx] ja SN[FPOI049 sNT_podous uewye) (d) SUuTys 1g sn (9) Suzys GZ6T sn SUTHS 8 [sn] uw Sysueyddyssyestw uoqebyr {Ty (9) suzys 629 sn (D) sutys 6y azo0e Ad (9) 8UuTys GAHZT N (9) surys GER wu (9) surys Eve aa (Dd) sutys 87 oa (9) suzys 6y ZG 09 (D9) suTys GAGt 09 (9) surys TeIsy oa ‘dds eeppuozebttty II XTONIddy (9) 8utyXs OOF Cxx] HI stsuowets sn[Apodsoug (9) suzys 69z [xx] MZ (9) suzys Gz (D) Sut ys Gz [mz] UZ SUTYS GE Con] AT SNIFAOTFU sNTAposouy I XTANIdd¥ Oe ee i Oe I eB ee) ve ee (3SOduNd) G3aLNOday (AsOduNd) GaLNOdaY NTNTNO LuOdXa S.LNOdX3-3Y/SLNOdXA S.LNOdWI dO ANLNNOD S3793adS T'I/18/d£ NYdYL OL LNOdWI T9861 (*3u05) g xtpueddy, 158 Japan Imports SUTHS OOF CHU] ud Mab Wo! [os] ud UTyS T (pda] aud (9) uFys I [9d] ja eeautnbaenou aeeutNbeenou snypAposoun (9) suzys zg HLL ‘dds aepy{Aposoun II. XTQNAddY Ee Nr = UY SOS 7 TROT Sg ge (3SOddNd) GALYOdaY (3SOd4Nd) G3.LYOdau NININO LYOdX3 SI.MOdXA-JUN/SLYOdXA S.LUOdWT. 40 AYX.UNNOD SATOAdS Z'I/18/d£ NYdUL OL AYOdWT. TH6T (*}U09) g xtpuaeddy ’ Japan Imports SUTyS SUT}S (9) supys qy'bs (9) suyys (9) supys sqTy (9) septs by (9) saps (9) suTys (9) supys ay (9) suyys (9) supys EES 908 S6T 1¥6 elt Of VOET ort 8S GSES, 60T (3SOduNd) G3L4Oday S.LYOdX3—34/S.LYOdX] TL T'I/28/d£ (J) supys (9) surys (9) suzys by (9) sutys (9) surys (D) suyys (9) supys by (9) sutys (9) suzys by (9) supys (9) suyzys (9) suyys ag (9) surys (9) supys (asodund) GaLNoday SLYOdWI NY¥d¥CL OL LYOdWI Cav] ATI. aueoeh sn{[~poovous uewTpe) (vd] AL snosn} SN Tpods0ud uewye) [Ad] 4H [09] oH Coal MH Coa] Mu [ad] uA Coa] 3a SN[Tpodv0ud sn{Tpos0us ueuTed sn sn STsusTddyss{ssyw uoqebry{ Ty EOE sn o0vs Coo] 9S Tb1986 Ad OO9E6 Ad 168 ST. £96 Coo] MH 9/ Coa] 4H ZIT Coa] MH E NH OEt MH (As) qa 7ZE AY 9f6 LY ‘dds sepzuoqebrt Ty IL XTONaddY 002 Hd. sqtsuswets sn{[Aposouy [xx] UE] snsouod sn{Apos0.a9 T XTAQNAddY NIOTNO AMOdXA 4O AYLNNOD S3IDAdS (°3u0D) g xTpuseddy 160 Japan Imports (3) SUTXS 986 (9) Suzys G69 (9) (9) (9) SUS SUTAS SUTYS (9) sup ys 6x (9) SUT YS (9) surys by (9) Upys aseo (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) (9) SUTYS BEET SUT}8 SUTY¥S sUTyS SUTYyS SUTYHE SUTyS SUTS suT4s SUT Ss sesupnbaenou seautnbeenou sn{Aposoup ‘dds sept [Aposoun aueoeAh SnN{[ fFposo0us uewye TT. XTONAddY a eee eee ears (3sOdund) GILNOdIY S1.YOdXa-3Y/S.LYOd XA (AsOdduNd) OALYOdaY S.LYOdWI (xx] ul Car] ad Mu. HL Cus] 9s (94) 9S [9d] 9S (ox) 1S Carl 9S Car] 9S 9S Od AT 9 ud sa 09 (aa) 4 [Ad] LT NIOIYO LYOdXxa JO AX.LNNOD SATOAdS Pa ah Neh Re f° 1/28/do NYdUFS OO. LYOdWI (°}U05) g xtpueddy ZRGT Japan Imports (9) suyys ZI - [Ad] ud (9) supys oT [xx] 3a snosny sn _pooous ueutes (D9) suTyxs GGBG {on] Ss (9) suzys by byVvEZT Ad (9) SUENS OOVAT Ad (9) sUurys OT ee Koo) | AL (D) SsuLys E712 (oa] AT (9) Seprs ZIT [Ad] ad (D) septs TRAaz [oo] au (9) suzys 6y G6TE [xx] 09 (9) sutys 64 OG/+ (vaJ (ha) (D9) suzys by 62T on (D) SUTxsS OLEOT oa (9) suzys 0974 [xx] iv (9) SUTXS OFOZ CAd] AY (9) Suzys IGT Ca9] Ly SN[TFPOI0UD SNTFpoI04d uUew TED (9) SUuTyxs O99b (D) SUTys 2562 sn (9) SUExs O64 [xx] 9s (Dd) sutyxs O00Z Ad (9) suzys 6y OG Coal yH (9) SUTHS ETEE (9) suTys 71z (sa] ud (9) Suzys bbs Cxw] ud stsuetddyssysszw soqebyT TY IJ. XTANaddY (9) supys ace Cxx] ad (D9) suTys OT Cxx] 30 snsouod sntAposou (9D) sutys OT (mz] wd BNdFIOTFU snTAposouy I XIQNAddY (3sodund) GALyodaa Casodund) GaJ.oday NTOTYO LYOdX3 S.LYOdX3—34/S.LYOdX3 S.LYOdWI JO AYLNNOD S3aT0Ads >= T'I/€8/d£ NUdUCL OL J.YOdWI ENGI (*qu09 g xtTpueddy bs a Japan Imports (9) sutys z789T Dd snsosod sn{Aposoun (9) surys OTA Caz] 9S (9) sutys 6¥ 67ST Dd (9) Suzys sayouT 99508 Od (9) SUTXs OOTOT (9)7 sUTXs GEO Od (9) Suzys Gz [oa] LT (D9) suTys OF (9d) uA (9) suzys g [xx] qa aeournbaenou seautnbeenou sn{Aposoy (9) suzys by ovHz Ad (9) suyys SBYDUT OOGZ 2d ‘dds sn[Aposouy (9) sutyxs OOGOY Ad (9) supys 12g Cav] AL SBPTS 96F (xx] a) auweoeh SsN[ PFpodsoud uewyped (9) SUuTys HZ : (vd) LT snosns SNTFpoI0us uewped IT. XTAN3ddv oe Ae NOES ae ee (3sOdsnd) G3.LYOdaa (asod4Nd) GOAJ.NOdaY NIDNTYO LYodXa SLYOdX3-3Y/SLYOdX]A SLYOdWI 4O AYXLNNOD SATOAdS 2° I/€8/d£ NU¥dV£ OL LYOdWI EAGT (°3uU05) g xtpusddy 163 Japan Imports SUTYS OT (9) SufFys OT Mz (9) supys g (mzJ UZ SNITJOT TU sN_Aposoug (9) suyys 6y g98z Ad SUTHS LLZ (9) SUEyS HEE [Ad] Uy S9PTsS OOT [Ad] ad auwoeh sn[fpov0us uewye) (9) suyys OST Ad SUTYS 88 [Ad] II (9) sutys 09 {vd] LT SUTHS O9 [oo] II SEPTsS /6EZT (as] YI snoeny SN[T Tposo0ud uewzen (9) septs EeGscT aN (9) suyys se4yoUT O09 Mu. (9) suzyxs Sze [09] 9S (9) suzys by bZEvtt Ad (9) sufzys 6y OGST Kove) | sa (D9) sutys 64 7/62 Cxx] on (9) suzys 64 gs80z [vd] 09 SUTS OROT Cxx] iT) BN Fpos0ud sN{ fFposous uewTe) (9) supys by GZ sn (9) suTys 7¥S9 (9) sutys 9set sn SUTxS GEOT (9) Suzys EOET [sn] ad sysuafddyssysspw soRebT TTY TI. XTANIddY (9) suzys 6y Geet HL (9) sutys 008 HL sysueweys sn{Apoosouy SUTys bZ [9s] ad snsoiod sntApos0uy I XTAQNIddv (3SOduNd) G3LYOdAaN (aASOdNNd) GAaJYOdaY NTOTNO LUOdX S1.NOdX3—3YN/SLYOdX] S.LYOdWI 4O AYLNNOD S$31ID3dS T'I/¢8/d£ NYdYC OL LYOdWI b86I (°}3U05) g xtpueddy Japan Imports (9) SUTIs byGZ (9) sutys g90z id SUTYS OF [9d] ud snsouod sn Aposouy (9) sutys 6y ETE {or] 9S (9) SURx8 6949 Car] 9s (9) SUTNS ¥G66 (9) SUTxe 98/6 Nd SUPYS & [9d] LT. SUTAS OOT (D) SUTXS ENE (os] ul SUFy¥S OOT (D9) Suzys OF [9d] wd (9D) SUTAS 4G ("21 3a (9) sufpys Oz [9a] 3a aeauTnbeenou sesutnbsenou sn{ Apos0up IX XLONIddY (a3S0d4Nd) G3LYOday (4aSOduNd) GILYOday NIDINO J4O0dxa i S1.NOdXA-3N/S.LYOdXS S.LNOdWI AO AXLNNOD SALOAdS Z°I/v8/d£ NUdUF OL JNOdWI ynal (°}U0D) g xtTptreddy acc Japan Imports APPENDIX 9: SKIN SIZE CONVERSION FACTORS The following formulae are presented for the conversion of skin lengths to belly width and vice versa. These formulae were suggested for each species by one dealer based on his long experience in the trade. A 10% margin should be included to allow for individual variations. 1) Alligator mississippiensis / Caiman crocodilus belly width in inches Feet x 2.2 inches 2) Crocodylus porosus Feet x 2.4 inches belly width in inches 3) Crocodylus novaeguineae Feet x 2.5 inches = belly width in inches 4) Crocodylus niloticus Feet x 2.3 inches belly width in inches Caiman crocodilus skins are often shipped in 'tinga frames' which are the skins with tail, stomach, ossified sides and head cut off so that a cut-out rectangle of skin is produced. For wild specimens, the following table is presented whereby the size of the animal producing the skin can be estimated. Farmed or ranched animals are likely to be slightly shorter relative to the frame. Tinga Frame Length of Length (cm) e Animal = eae | 65 115 75 135 85 150 100 180 115 200 125 225 over 270 (maximum) The following table presents a conversion rate for tanned Caiman skin size to total length of body. rust Size (ft2 Body Length (cm) 166 Japan Imports The following table gives the number of skins required for a 1,000 ft2 of a particular size of finished skin. This conversion rate is applicable to any species of crocodilian. Quantity of Skins Finished Size | (piece/1000 ft2) 1,250 0.20 - 0.45 | | 700 0.50 - 0.85 500 0.90 - 1.25 300 1.30 + Appendix 10: Japanese [mports of Crocodile and Alligator Leather Source : Japanese Customs Statistics Year 1978 | 1979 | 1980 1982 ]1983 1984 North America Total Latin America / Caribbean =/|°s sje als Sila z 2 a o [-*) a OS) | a 2 ae eee eae re ae ee eee ee Latin America / Caribbean Total Pes [as [em [em [ew [ow [ae [oe | ae a = ~ s 8 = o Asia / Oeeania Total See ee ee eee | i Se a a ee ee ir i eae aa eRe Africa Total . Europe wo 520 n a ~~ Europe Total p : i 2 B Grand Total