Stop Wildlife Imports to India Until Proper Checks in Place: CITES Report
Table of Contents
Source: The Indian Express
Relevance: GS Paper 3 – Environment and Biodiversity Conservation
Key Concepts for Prelims and Mains:
For Prelims:
CITES, Wildlife (Protection) Act, GZRRC, RKTEWT (Radha Krishna Temple Elephant Welfare Trust)
For Mains:
Global wildlife trade governance and verification mechanisms, India’s compliance gaps and ethical wildlife trade issues, Importance of biodiversity conservation and traceability in tradeWhy in News?
A CITES verification mission has advised India to halt imports of critically endangered species — including gorillas, orangutans, chimpanzees, and snow leopards — until stronger due diligence and verification systems are in place, citing risks of wild-caught animals being falsely declared as captive-bred.
Key Findings of the CITES Report
Legal but Questionable Imports:
- All shipments had valid CITES permits, but doubts arose about the true origin of animals, accuracy of source (captive-bred) and purpose (zoo) codes, and India’s verification process.
Violation of Indian Zoo Law:
- The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 allows acquisition only between recognised zoos.
- Many imports came from commercial breeding facilities, not zoos — raising the risk of wild-caught animals being relabelled as captive-bred.
Animal Holdings:
- Greens Zoological Rescue & Rehabilitation Center (GZRRC)” in Gujarat: 41,839 animals
- Radha Krishna Temple Elephant Welfare Trust (RKTEWT) facilities in Jamnagar: 5,794 animals
- Both maintain high standards, though their sourcing practices were questioned.
Contradictory Records:
- Czech Republic stated animals were sold to GZRRC — contradicting India’s claim of rescue imports.
- Similar inconsistencies were found with Tunisia, Guyana, and Germany.
Questionable Origins from Africa & South America:
- African elephants imported from Tunisia were wild-caught from Burkina Faso.
- 363 animals (primates, crocodilians, anteaters) from Guyana were marked wild (Source W) but imported as Zoo specimens (Purpose Z).
Imports via UAE from Unlikely Breeding Sources:
- Chimpanzees (Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait)
- Bonobo (Iraq)
- Gorilla (Haiti)
- Cheetah (Syria)
Appendix-I Species under Confiscation (Code I):
Jaguars, ocelots, margays, jaguarundis, orangutans, and cheetahs imported from Mexico and UAE with unknown origin.
About CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora)
- Established: 1973
- Members: 185 countries
- Objective: Regulates international trade in endangered species to ensure it does not threaten their survival.
- Appendices Classification:
- Appendix I: Species threatened with extinction — trade allowed only in exceptional cases.
- Appendix II: Species not immediately threatened but trade must be controlled to avoid overexploitation.
- Appendix III: Species protected in at least one country seeking international cooperation.
- Permit System: Export/import of listed species requires permits from national CITES authorities.
- India’s Role:
- Party since: 1976
- Nodal Agency: Directorate of Wildlife Preservation under MoEFCC
- Legal Framework: Implementation aligns with the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972
CITES Recommendations for India
- Suspend imports of critically endangered species until verification mechanisms improve.
- Review import procedures and strengthen traceability of captive-bred claims.
- Verify flagged shipments with source and transit nations — Congo, Germany, Guyana, Iraq, Mexico, Syria, UAE.
- Take corrective measures where wild animals are mis declared as captive-bred.
- Submit a compliance report within 90 days to the CITES Standing Committee, meeting in Samarkand, Uzbekistan (Nov 2025).
India’s Response
- The MoEFCC cited the Supreme Court’s clean chit to the Jamnagar Vantara facility, asserting that all imports were CITES-compliant.
- However, the CITES Secretariat flagged contradictions in invoices and source records and demanded further clarification.
Implications
- Reveals gaps in wildlife import governance and the risk of India becoming a hub for illegal exotic animal trade.
- Calls for stronger traceability, digital verification, and coordination between CITES, MoEFCC, and Customs.
- Reinforces the need for global accountability in wildlife trade and ethical compliance with biodiversity norms.
Conclusion
The CITES report serves as a wake-up call for India to strengthen its wildlife import regulations. By enforcing rigorous verification, digital traceability, and international transparency, India can uphold its commitment to biodiversity conservation while ensuring that its global reputation remains untarnished.
UPSC PYQ:
Q. With reference to the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which of the following statements is/are correct? (UPSC Prelims 2015)
- IUCN is an organ of the United Nations and CITES is an international agreement between governments.
- IUCN runs thousands of field projects around the world to better manage natural environments.
- CITES is legally binding on the States that have joined it, but this Convention does not take the place of national laws.
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Correct Answer: (b) 2 and 3 only
Explanation:
- Statement 1 – Incorrect: IUCN is not an organ of the United Nations; it is an independent international organization.
- Statement 2 – Correct: IUCN runs global field projects for ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation.
- Statement 3 – Correct: CITES is legally binding on member states but does not override national laws.
CARE MCQ:
Q. With reference to India’s participation in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), consider the following statements:
- India became a member of CITES in 1976.
- The Directorate of Wildlife Preservation under the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) serves as India’s CITES Management Authority.
- Implementation of CITES in India is governed by the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Correct Answer: (a) 1 and 2 only
Explanation:
- Statement 1 – Correct: India joined CITES in 1976.
- Statement 2 – Correct: The Directorate of Wildlife Preservation under MoEFCC acts as India’s CITES Management Authority.
- Statement 3 – Incorrect: CITES implementation in India aligns with the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, not the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.