What could go wrong? The consul’s report said human-animal competition led to the creation of nine thousand open irrigation wells ten feet wide and one hundred feet deep, with no rails, boundaries, or markings. The wells would be dangerous to any species (including humans) walking near one at night, and there were some fifty incidents of lions drowning. As a result, the forestry department raised funds to fence in two thousand of these wells.
Inbreeding presented an even more serious threat to Gujarat’s lions. One solution would split the population and move at least half to a neighboring state. Gujarat officials vehemently opposed the plan, citing the likelihood of poachers in neighboring states. The Indian government spent $6.4 million preparing for the relocation, but Gujarat state officials dug in. Local Indian NGOs filed litigation on behalf of the lions, and the case went to India’s Supreme Court. The court subsequently ruled that the Gujarat government must relocate some of the lions to neighboring state Madhya Pradesh’s Kuno-Palpur sanctuary.31 But in March 2015, Gujarat officials were using other legal arguments to fight the Supreme Court ruling, and the fate of the lions was still undecided.
The year 2010 was the Year of the Tiger, and with a wild population of only thirty-two hundred animals, thirteen tiger-range states convened a series of meetings of the World Bank’s Global Tiger Initiative (GTI), a partnership with the Smithsonian, the International Tiger Coalition (a consortium of thirty-nine NGOs), and both the South Asia Wildlife Enforcement Network (SA-WEN) and the U.S.-supported Association of Southeast Asian Nations Wildlife Enforcement Network (ASEAN-WEN). The amount of American diplomatic activity, reporting, and above all funding of these initiatives is all the more remarkable since there are no wild tigers in North America (although there are many in captivity). Adding to the challenge is that some of the thirteen countries in which tigers range—including Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burma, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Nepal, Russia, Thailand, and Vietnam—have spotty records on tiger conservation efforts.
Embassy officers in Nepal had warned in 2009 that although momentum was building for the GTI through a workshop designed to foster regional cooperation, consensus, and antitrafficking efforts, the momentum alone “will not save the tiger without concrete actions on the ground.” 32 And indeed, a follow-on GTI meeting in November 2009 of more than two hundred tiger experts from governments and NGOs ended in a series of sensible recommendations, but not before China proposed legalized trade in tiger parts, a move rejected by all the other states. As described early in the chapter, China allows tiger farming, a controversial practice tiger experts reject as a means of legalizing the sale of products such as pelts and parts, “providing an unacceptable incentive to consumer demand that would give motivation to kill the few tigers remaining in the wild.” 33 And at the GTI ministerial, it was China that, consistent with its previous position, lodged reservations on the final declaration’s separate trade section that banned trade in tigers and tiger parts.34
Sometimes tigers clash with other critically endangered species, a factor the U.S. consulate in Vladivostok, located at the crossroads of western Russia, China, and North Korea, noted in its all-out reporting efforts on behalf of the Amur leopard, the world’s rarest big cat. Some thirty-five remained in the wild when the cables were written in 2008; today, according to WWF, their total has almost doubled. The Amur tiger, also endangered, threatens the much smaller leopard. Tiger-on-leopard attacks have increased because of reductions in their hunting habitat, which has pushed tigers into the leopards’ range. The exacerbating factor is the deforestation of trees producing pine nuts, a staple for wild boar, which is the foundation of both the leopard and tiger diet. Much of the pine is illegally harvested and exported to China, ultimately winding up in furniture for various U.S. chains.35
Reporting officers had continual contact with the WWF and a host of Vladivostok-based NGOs. They noted that none of the workers had ever seen a leopard in the wild (all the leopard film footage is captured by hidden cameras). The consulate remained heavily engaged, organizing films and lectures, chronicling joint efforts of U.S. and Russian scientists to use radio tracking collars, and bringing in a big cat expert from the National Institutes of Health to examine the genetic makeup of the remaining leopards. Heart murmurs and reproductive problems pointed to inbreeding concerns.36
Consulate staff wrote about hiking through leopard territory on WWF-leased forest in Barabash, across Amurskiy Bay and inland from Vladivostok, and warned that a planned six-lane highway would cut through the leopard’s remaining habitat. Officers said local conservationists were skeptical of the construction company’s promise to build tunnels for the leopards, citing the Russian proverb, “Promises don’t mean there will be a wedding.”
A year later, the consul general reported that the forest mafia, which had taken enormous illegal harvests of cedar and other rare species, had torched the houses of two WWF workers and had declared war on anyone working to protect forests and enforce environmental laws.37 The illegal logging industry of Russia’s far east is run by criminal gangs, sometimes called forest mafia. They filled a vacuum after the fall of the Soviet Union and the collapse of state-supported forest industries, which led to widespread unemployment. Taking advantage of the sparse population and even sparser law enforcement presence, they chop down hardwood species of ash, maple, and oak, destroying habitat for critically endangered species.
This remarkable series of reports on the prospects for the Amur tiger and leopard shows both the reach and the limitations of diplomatic reporting. The consulate wrote passionately about wildlife and detailed the work of NGOs, but at the end of the day, the Russian government has to take action.
Birding Mania
Many species of birds are endangered, and embassies found opportunities to report on migratory and exotic birds, ranging from the parrots of the Amazon to the cranes of Burma. Even in war-wracked Somalia, an officer took time to note the mysterious death of fifty Croatian-tagged white storks in a local village. The storks, native to a village about sixty-four kilometers southeast of Zagreb, were noteworthy, the officer insisted, because they had been tagged and sampled for avian influenza testing at Croatia’s Poultry Center Lab with negative results. Storks from Croatia usually migrate to South Africa on a route through Egypt and Sudan, and experts were puzzled as to why they should have flown far off course to Somalia. The local residents in Elbaraf notified vets after they saw the exotic birds unable to fly and walking with difficulty. By the time veterinarians arrived in the village, the carcasses had been piled up and were too decomposed to test. With obvious consternation, the officer reported that the cause of death would remain a mystery.38
Diplomats are trained to be nonjudgmental, but sometimes their outrage shows through. One officer visited Kachin State in Burma, which sits on a major migratory bird flight path and attracts bird-watchers from around the world. “Recently, a rare endangered Siberian crane was spotted along the banks of the Irrawaddy River. The large bird dancing on the riverbank began to attract large numbers of gazers. Eventually they included the military, who proceeded to shoot the rare bird.” 39
Defending avian wildlife can be a dangerous business. Brazil’s Tinguá Natural Reserve in Nova Iguaçu was the scene of the 2005 murder of a celebrated naturalist who spent fifteen years of his life defending the reserve from illegal trade. The suspect, allegedly hired by a group of poachers, animal traders, and corrupt environmental officials, was a hunter who grew up in the area and sold tropical birds and other animals to local restaurants. The challenge of patrolling Brazil’s vast wildlife regions is overwhelming, with one inspector for every ninety-one thousand acres of protected land. Home to dozens of rare and endangered species, wildlife trafficking in birds has reached a critical state. The consulate estimated Brazil accounted for about 10 percent of the world’s illegal trade in wild animals, of which nearly half—mostly parrots and other birds—went to Europe and the U.S.40
Parrots are also native
to Africa. The Cameroon minister for Forests and Wildlife said he was trying to improve governance in the corruption-riddled forestry and wildlife sectors and told the U.S. ambassador that police had intercepted one thousand parrots being smuggled out of Douala.41 The situation for birds in neighboring Nigeria is even grimmer. Wildlife officials told the embassy that the Hajj- and Umrah-chartered flights for religious pilgrimages were convenient conduits for trafficking in wildlife, particularly parrots. Trafficking overland is also rampant, and smugglers use empty fuel tankers to export live birds, as well as hides, skins, and ivory.42
THE EATERS
While the wildlife preservation movement mainly targets the illegal market in ivory for decorative or medicinal uses, a considerable proportion of poaching is for food. In most of the world, meat of any kind is a luxury, and the most exotic sources are in high demand. The U.S. embassy in Hanoi summed up the problem in a cable titled “We Eat Everything on Four Legs Except the Table.” Writers documented Vietnam’s voracious consumption of wild animals and concluded that cravings for wild meat trumped wildlife concerns. According to the embassy, demand increased as Vietnamese got wealthier, and most failed to see any link between wild animal products and diseases, despite outbreaks of avian flu and SARS. Forest rangers were shot in the line of duty, and official impunity compounded the problem. A high-level Vietnamese official and war hero was allowed to keep nineteen tigers smuggled in from Cambodia despite the clear violation of CITES regulations. Vietnam is also a transshipment point for animals brought into China by wildlife smuggling networks that the embassy believes are well organized and linked to cross-border drug and counterfeit trading.
Vietnam is home to 10 percent of the world’s species, several of which are only found in Vietnam. The embassy related the usual story: the government lacks will and the people lack awareness. NGOs estimate three thousand tons of edible wildlife are traded every year for $67 million. Delicacies, including Malayan sun bears, pangolins, turtles, snakes, lizards, macaques, langurs, leopards, tigers, porcupines, wild pigs, civets, and birds are among the many exotic and endangered animals bound for Vietnamese tables. Nearly half of Hanoi residents consume wild animals, a custom the embassy cynically called Vietnam’s version of PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals.43
Vietnamese wild game restaurants in Ho Chi Minh City also serve bear products, and the consulate reported that the capital lacks the will to eradicate illegal bear farms “against the backdrop of widespread lack of appreciation for, or commitment to, the protection of wildlife in Vietnam.” The officers wrote that bear bile extracted from the gallbladders and paws remains highly prized in Vietnam as an aphrodisiac and health tonic. According to the NGO Animals Asia Foundation, three thousand to four thousand bears are caged throughout Vietnam, often in wretched conditions.44
ZOOS
Since the dawn of diplomacy, countries have been giving each other exotic animals as gifts. Over time, zoos replaced royal menageries, and common people gazed at exotic animals brought from distant corners of the empire as a symbol of a nation’s imperialism.45 Perhaps no zoo animal is more iconic than the panda, which came to symbolize China and its efforts to emerge through “panda diplomacy” from decades of isolation. The Chinese have successfully managed to “own” pandas, retaining exclusive rights in a way that no other country has managed with any other animal. To meet incessant demand (and take advantage of a lucrative export), China has developed panda breeding centers and worked to master the difficult feat of reproduction of pandas in captivity. The U.S. consulate in Chengdu was surprised by the high survival rate of the Ya’an Panda Breeding Center’s panda twins. All twins born in 2009 survived as the staff became adept at switching them back and forth so the mother would feed both of them. The cable noted that offspring born to pandas lent to foreign zoos also belong to China under the terms of the standard panda agreement.46
Embassy officers see zoos as a barometer of a country’s humanitarian values and civility. The plight of zoo animals in war-torn or impoverished countries is not difficult to imagine. The 2009 inauguration of President Obama sparked a photo contest in Albania called “A Day of Change,” which one photographer marked by taking photos at the zoo. “No one needs greater change in Tirana than these poor animals living in this decrepit zoo,” he declared.47
For entirely different reasons, the Baghdad Zoo, one of the largest in the Middle East, became an early symbol of poor planning when many animals died in the chaos that followed the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. A few years later, embassy officers were surprised to discover that the local zoo had become the most popular destination for family outings in postwar Baghdad. Attendance doubled between 2006 and 2008 along with revenues, allowing the zoo to hire one hundred workers and fourteen veterinarians. The embassy noted special features unique to Baghdad, including the daily slaughter of two donkeys to feed the lions, and exotic fish with the image of the old Iraqi flag etched permanently into their scales. With the old flag outlawed, zoo officials were uncertain whether they would subject the fish to laser surgery to remove the illegal version.
Another big draw are the exotic animals formerly possessed by Saddam Hussein and his family, including his son Uday’s cheetah, now tame enough for petting, and the growing pride begun by two of Saddam’s lions. The zoo also exhibits some “disheveled looking brown bears, reportedly plied with arak” (an alcoholic beverage), and Saddam’s former stallion, billed as “the most famous horse in Iraq.” The embassy suspected the zoo’s large public garden and proximity to the relatively safe international zone, commonly called the Green Zone and filled with international organizations, embassies, and the security forces to protect all of them, might have been partially responsible for its popularity.48
A newer and far more troubled zoo was Chiang Mai’s Night Safari, a pet project of deposed Thai prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who built it in his native city after seeing a similar zoo in Singapore. The embassy and consulate sent Washington five cables between 2005 and 2008 dissecting the development as a litmus test for animal rights, environmental protection, and political corruption.
The Night Safari story is a comedy of errors in which each unwise action is compounded. To begin with, the government imported 175 nonnative large animals from Kenya, ostensibly as a gift, or, as the cables darkly suggest, as pawns in exchange for Thai votes backing Kenya’s bid for a seat on the United Nations Security Council. Wildlife NGOs predicted a high mortality rate during a mass move of such a great distance. Upon arrival, the animals were confronted with cages that were too small, inadequate sunlight, and insufficient roaming space.49
Night Safari also planned to bring in rare species of white rhino, leopards, and spotted hyenas, all of which are protected under CITES. Its website advertises a Safari Zone with nonnative animals, including white rhinos, hyenas, lions, cheetahs, wildebeests, giraffes, ostriches, zebras, water buffalos, kangaroos, dingos, and emus; and a Predator Prowl Zone populated with tigers, lions, African hunting dogs, vultures, wolves, white tigers, Canadian wolves, Asiatic black bears, and crocodiles. Somewhat disconcertingly, the website reassures guests: “Don’t worry, all the nasty animals are well fenced in.” 50
All this was merely backdrop to the jaw-dropping suggestion of Night Safari’s director to serve dishes made with exotic animals in one of the zoo’s restaurants. The director planned to offer set meals of zebra, lion, and crocodile, prepared by prominent chefs, for $112 dollars a plate. Digging in, he insisted that the animals on the menu were not endangered species, a fact that did little to pacify animal lovers. Even local monks objected, and the director was forced to concede. Only locally raised crocodile and ostrich would be served. The embassy noted the dining plan was particularly appalling given Thailand’s bid to be a leader in regional wildlife conservation. At the time, it was about to host the launch of the ASEAN Wildlife Enforcement Network (WEN), which aims to reduced illegal wildlife trafficking.51
Six months later, Night Safari was in trouble again. T
he U.S. consulate in Chiang Mai reported that an alliance of NGOs had filed a case in the Supreme Administrative Court, accusing the government-appointed tourism administration of “illegally encroaching on the Suthep-Pui National Park” to create Night Safari. The cable stated that the Love Chiang Mai Alliance “charged that Thaksin’s ideas for tourism development are poorly conceived, environmentally harmful, not transparent and lacking in community input.” Although the park is still up and running, which means that the NGOs lost, it is significant that an alliance of NGOs actually tried to take the government to court in the first place.
Public relations disasters multiplied. An escaped (nonnative) wolf prowled the area, eating villagers’ chickens. Then Night Safari road construction was blamed for flooding. Finally, Thaksin’s plans for a large elephant park with tourist lodgings put him at odds not only with villagers but with the military, given that a road for the park would go through a Thai army training area.52
Thaksin’s cavalier approach to wildlife earned him more opprobrium when he focused on orangutans. Perhaps no single species of zoo animal faces a more precarious existence, even though they enjoy full protection under CITES, which bans their trade. Originally native to Indonesia and Malaysia, they are now found only in the wild in remoter parts of Borneo and Sumatra. Embassy Bangkok officers recounted “Orangutan Odysseys,” which painstakingly detailed the trek and ultimate fate of a now-you-see-them-now-you-don’t group of fifty-seven illegally trafficked orangutans through Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, and Indonesia.
Thai animal parks—this time Safari World in Bangkok—played a prominent role in the scheme. The story began when Thai authorities took custody of fifty-seven orangutans from Safari World. The owner first insisted the orangutans were offspring of parents acquired before Thailand’s accession to CITES back in 1994. He later changed his story to say they had been given to Safari World by pet owners who no longer wanted to keep them and that Safari World was “performing a public service.” Ultimately, he admitted to having obtained the animals illegally.
To the Secretary Page 21