The Republic of Suriname is the second of the three Guianas in size and population, and with a human population approaching 431,000 inhabitants in an area of 166,000 square kilometres; it is one of the least populated tropical countries in the world. Most of these inhabitants are concentrated in the capital city, Paramaribo, and in the small towns of the coastal region. Only about five percent of the population lives in the interior, mostly in small, scattered villages along the country's seven major rivers and their creeks. Otherwise, the interior is uninhabited and covered with undisturbed Neotropical Amazonian forest (Mittermeier et. al., 1990).

Suriname's varied habitats are home to 668 species of birds, 184 species of mammals, 152 species of reptiles, 95 species of amphibians, more than 300 species of freshwater fishes, and at least 4,500 species of flowering plants. Endemism in Suriname is very low, as almost all of its natural diversity is shared with neighbouring Guyana, French Guiana, northern Brazil, and eastern Venezuela. But it is the low population pressure and undisturbed quality of a large part of its environment that makes the conservation of biodiversity in Suriname so important.

Historically Suriname has been regarded as a leader in conservation and forestry management in the region. A total of 11 Nature Reserves, one Nature Park and three multiple-use management area existed in May, 2001 and five others, proposed in 1980, may be ratified soon (Mittermeier et. al., 1990). However this environmental-friendly image was usurped by pressing economic concerns following the country's political and economic collapse from 1986 to 1992 when key personnel emigrated in droves. Regulations are still enforced by the Nature Conservation Division (NB) of the Suriname Forest Service (LBB) in spite of severe budget cuts, rampant inflation, lack of equipment, and lack of trained personnel. So far Suriname's Forest Service has not regained its former rank or rebuilt its infrastructure due to financial reasons. The commitment is still there but not the means to adequately monitor, enforce or control. Indeed one wonders how so few people have managed to do so much for so long with so little.

Legal Framework and Hunting Regulations

The Suriname Forest Service (LBB) under the Ministry of Natural Resources is responsible for the implementation of the laws governing the country's natural resources. It places a high priority on conservation and sustainable development. The Nature Conservation Division (NB) of the Suriname Forest Service enforces legislation such as the Game Law and CITES Convention, and issues export permits for CITES and non-CITES wildlife and CITES plants such as orchids. The Fisheries Division under the Ministry of Agriculture enforces the Fish Protection Act and the Sea Fisheries Act.

Protection of biodiversity, including wildlife trade, comes under the Nature Preservation Act (GB 1954, N0. 26), the Game Law (GB 1954, No. 25, with amendments in 1971, 1980, 1982, 1986, 1994) and the Game Resolution of 1970 (GB 1973 no. 104, with amendments in 1973 no. 173), the annual Ministerial Game Decrees, the Fish Protection Act (GB 1961, N0. 44; amended in 1963), the Fish Protection Resolution (1961 no. 101) and the Sea Fisheries Act (1980 no. 144). Suriname is a Party to several conventions, e.g. CITES, Wetlands Convention, Convention on Biological Diversity and World Heritage Convention. The Law on Forest Management (SB 1992 no. 80) covers the export of timber and non-timber forest products, including orchids and medicinal plants. Only 28 species of orchids may be exported and require a CITES export permit issued by the Management Authority LBB/NB

The Game Act of 1954 distinguishes the following wildlife categories: game species, cage species, predominantly harmful species and protected species. Wildlife species (particularly reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates) that are mentioned under these categories are not protected.

Maximum penalties for violation of the Game Law and Game Resolution of 1970 are small (10.000 Surinamese guilders (Sf) or about US $ 4.50) but under the Law of Economic Offenses (SB 1986 No.2), which covers Game Law violations, fines may reach one million Sf or about $ 450 with up to 6 years imprisonment but we were unable to find a single prosecution at this level. Violators, usually hunters, see their booty confiscated and pay a small fine. In the case of wildlife, the animal is confiscated.

Suriname ratified CITES in 1981. However, CITES species may or may not be listed in one or more categories of the Game Law. Their export is in any case regulated by the CITES-listed species permitting procedures. Modifications to the Game Act were proposed in 1982 and ratified and new ones are currently being drafted. Until the Game Law is modified, some species listed in CITES Appendix II are therefore not protected in Suriname by the Game Law. However, all specimens of wild game and flora require a permit for export or import on base of the State Resolution Negative List (G.B. 1999 no.34, amended in 2000, G.B. 2000 no. 58) of the Import and Export Law. For game there is an open and closed hunting season and bag limits for the coastal area.

The export of wildlife is regulated since 1986 by a voluntary quota system for commercial exporters, residents and non-residents. Only the species on the quota lists may be exported up to their listed quota level (Tables 2, 4). The quotas for commercial exporters are divided between the 25 licensed exporters. The permit fees of 2% of the Freight-on-Board (FOB) values are levied on each shipment and paid into the Treasury. The cost of the permit and the security stamps are also not retained by NB/LBB and go to the Treasury. Other fees are paid to Customs and the Veterinary Inspectors.

The International Trade in wildlife is an important source of revenues, taxes and employment for Suriname. LBB/NB estimated that in the beginning of 1995 90 full-time, 140 part-time (mostly indigenous people of the interior) and 75 incidental workers were involved in the wildlife trade (Baal, F. & Hiwat, M.M., 1996).

Enforcement and record keeping

The 12 LBB/NB wildlife enforcement officers in Paramaribo and two in Nickerie mainly enforce hunting and nature reserve regulations. A major obstacle to adequate law enforcement is the lack of transport and fuel. Three officers are issued with a motorbike but funds are rarely available to fuel the two trucks, boats, or outboards so their range is restricted to town (where most of the offenses do not occur) and infrequent mobile control outside Paramaribo. Until June 2001 they received a more or less similar project support out of the WWF-Nature Conservation Division project. Further the salaries are now so small, due to inflation (US $75 per month!), that most officers have second and third jobs. Once properly salaried, trained and equipped they could become an efficient wildlife trade monitoring-unit, as they appear to be motivated and eager to watch out for wildlife trade violations and smuggling.

The CITES Secretariat requires detailed annual reports of CITES species. The CITES Permit office recently started a computerized wildlife export tracking system. As each of the 25 exporters has their own quota of listed species, this requires careful tracking. Until then all export trade data were entered manually on lists for each species and each exporter! The Permit Office is now looking into a computerized security-CITES permitting system similar to those used in other countries.
.

No rare woods monitoring or plant identification is done by Customs. There are no Customs ID manuals to identify CITES species, the many look-alike non-CITES reptiles, small birds and 28 orchids on the quota list.

Export of CITES species and quotas

Suriname has scrupulously implemented CITES regulations since it ratified the Convention in 1981. The Permit Office of the Nature Conservation Division goes by the book. However permits are hand typed which may lead to subsequent falsification of documents in transit or re-use of the permit for other shipment. Recent falsification and re-use of permits for non-CITES permits was discovered and safeguards have now been put in place to rectify the situation.

The Nature Conservation Commission is the advisory body on the Nature Conservation Law and Game Law. It also serves as the Scientific Authority for CITES. However, due to attrition, only the Chairman is still serving. The CITES Scientific Authority therefore cannot issue new non-detrimental findings and the quota system it developed in the 1980s is still being used. LBB/NB is currently recruiting additional members for this Commission, which would be representative of all stakeholders.

CITES-listed birds (mainly Psittacines and some toucans) form the bulk of the trade in terms of value, and reptiles and amphibians account for the largest number of CITES specimens exported (Table 2).

The trade in CITES species has been slowly declining since 1997, particularly for primates ­ 942 primates were exported in 1997 and none in 2000. The decline is due to a variety of causes:
1. More restrictive regulations now exist in importing countries. The USA, once the largest importer of wild psittacines, now has imposed a complete import ban on the importation of wild and captive birds (Wild Bird Conservation Act 1992) unless such importations are proved to be 1) biologically sustainable, 2) non-detrimental to the species in the wild on a species-by-species basis, and 3) that CITES is being implemented effectively in the country exporting the birds.
2. Such detailed information is lacking in both Suriname and Guyana. Also, Japan, once a large importer of laboratory primates, now has long quarantines and restrictive national regulations as well.
3. CITES regulations, in force since 1975, are well implemented by both exporting and importing signatory countries.
4. Many commercial passenger and cargo airlines ban the transport of wildlife, which force exporters to ship wildlife on special chartered flights.
5. There is a dwindling consumer interest in keeping wild pets and most zoos have captive breeding programs, making imports from the wild unnecessary. Trade in the rarer species is destined for specialized collectors.

Wildlife exports, especially birds, are shipped mainly to the Netherlands, where they may be immediately re-exported, and, more recently, to Belgium. This is due to the long-standing commercial ties between Suriname and the Netherlands. Belgium became a principal destination when traders used City Bird airlines which allowed wildlife cargo flights and landed in Brussels. Shipments of Saimiri sciureus are shipped directly to Japan for the laboratory primate trade. Large shipments of reptiles go to the Unites States. Another 13 countries are listed as destinations in 2000 (Table 3c).

Export of Non-CITES species and quotas

Suriname has set voluntary quotas for CITES and non-CITES species and minimal FOB prices since 1986. Today 85 birds, 9 mammals, 6 amphibians, 5 turtles, 7 lizards, and 4 reptile species are listed ­ a small portion of the country's rich biodiversity. The total quota for birds is for 25,232 specimens but in 2000, for instance, only 7,316 were actually exported (Table 2d). The reason for this is that the list covers species of small birds that are the most likely to be caught by mist netting. Rarer species are excluded from the list even though they may also be caught in the mist net. However, we were told by an animal exporter that when a protected species is mist netted by mistake, it is killed by the trapper and fed to the reptiles in his holding area!

Of the 85 bird species on the quota list, specimens of only 63 species were actually exported in 2000 whereas specimens of all the reptile and amphibian species listed were exported with only two exceptions (Table 2d). We recommend that the number of species be reduced. Many of these small bird species are specialist feeders, some only insect eaters that are difficult to transport without high mortality and many are high forest or even canopy species that are prone to stress and unsuitable for the wildlife trade. We were told that a "specialist" in such birds exports the more "difficult" birds and that the mortality is at an acceptable level. During a previous evaluation of the wildlife trade in Suriname, the author reported " that approximately 30% of the songbirds [in the holding areas] appeared to be in poor condition" (Nash, S. V., 1997).

Stakeholders: Wildlife harvesters and exporters

The Minister of Trade issued Animal Exporter Licenses on demand until recently. No proof of knowledge or training was necessary. However, now all exporters must meet a number of requirements regarding holding facilities, hygiene and administration record-keeping before they are qualified to apply for CITES or LBB non-CITES export permits.

The number of licensed traders has gone from 7 to 25 in 8 years ­ a fact which is deeply resented by the established wildlife traders who view this as unwelcome competition. (However, it must be noted that our first-hand observations of wildlife smuggling involved members of the two associations and not the "newcomers.") There are two wildlife exporter associations with 16 members, while another 9 exporters operate independently. (Table 5). LBB/NB has placed an additional 7 new exporters on a "waiting list" as it too feels there are now too many exporters.

Licensed trappers (endorsed by their exporters) catch wildlife using mist nets at ground level and in the tree canopy. Larger macaws are snared from a concealed perch in a tree using a tethered tame macaw to attract others. Reptiles are gathered by hand one by one. .The open season for trapping parrots is from July 1 to December 31

There are few middlemen in Suriname; this minimizes delay in getting animals from catching areas to holding areas in town. Exporters license their own team of trappers in the interior and pick up the shipments by plane or truck once or twice a week. Mortality is reported as being 10-30% during the first six weeks after capture (Schouten, K., 1995).

In Apura I met with a wildlife catcher who took orders from traders in Paramaribo. He had a small holding facility with a few cages containing parrots, tortoises and agoutis. He told me there were many professional catchers in the Apura area and nearby Washabo who find other kinds of work during the closed season from January to July 1.

Hunting Pressure

Game species may be hunted during the open hunting season, as set by the Game Resolution of 1970 and the Ministerial Decree of 2001 on the basis of the Game Law of 1954. However the Game Law still only applies to the northern third of the country, leaving the vast interior unregulated with no closed season or controls. However if wildlife or bushmeat is transported from the unregulated interior into the area where the Game Law applies during the closed hunting or trapping season it will be confiscated if found.

Suriname has a vast and remote interior where the Game Law regulations do not apply. The indigenous people rely on bush meat for food and on the trapping of wild species for cash. Some species are both hunted for food and trapped for export (Table 8). Formerly hunting pressure was sustainable due to the small size of the villages in the interior but today many of the larger villages are overcrowded. Further, hunting for food, ever-larger kitchen gardens, the commercial bush meat trade and the wildlife trade result in the overexploitation of the resource and habitat destruction in a radius of 25-50 km. In the Apura-Washabo region, hunters report having to walk at least 3 days in the forest to find larger species like peccaries or deer.

There are also year-round commercial bush meat hunters in the interior who export bush meat and smoked fish by boat or small plane to town. There are many reports of the unregulated transport of bush meat and smoked fish to markets in Paramaribo, Nickerie and Albina ­ a growth industry.

NB wildlife enforcement officers report that waterfowl, ibis, wood storks are in sharp decline due to hunting pressure in the coastal region. The Indians in Washabo report that hunters from Nickerie have reduced the number of once abundant wild Muscovy ducks, a CITES species, to only a few individuals. However, the wildlife trade rarely exports the Muscovy duck.

Reported Smuggling

The Surinamese favor two species of song birds as pets Oryzoborus crassirostris (Large-billed finch or twatwa) and Oryzoborus angolensis (Lesser seed finch or Picolet). These birds are entered in singing competitions with cash prizes and top birds are valued at up to US $ 40,000 each! No export permits are given but birds are smuggled out of the country in personal baggage to the Netherlands. If caught at the airport, the birds are released immediately by the Military Police. Smuggling of these birds from Guyana, Brazil and French Guiana into Suriname has also been reported by the authorities. Ornithologists report that these two species are now practically absent from the coastal and rare in the Sipaliwini savannah regions and elsewhere.

Maroon catchers smuggle parrots and small songbirds from Suriname to French Guiana, across the Marowijne River, and sell the birds along the road from Saint-Laurent to Kourou (as reported by the French Customs chief inspector). The birds are confiscated, treated at a rehabilitation center and/or released.

We observed and photographed, in September 2000, Guyanese trappers catch scarlet macaws and blue and green macaws in the Apura region, in a creek along Suriname's Corantyne River. The birds are then smuggled into Guyana, usually by way of Nickerie. Since all parrots are listed on CITES Appendix II, this is a serious violation.

We also personally observed and photographed 14 scarlet macaws in two small handmade wire mesh cages (with no food or water-photograph 1) at the commercial boat landing near Nickerie at the mouth of the Corantyne River. There appeared to be no police or customs control at this boat landing. When we asked where they were going we were told they would be picked up by a trader and taken to Guyana ­ where there is a zero export quota for Scarlet macaws. We were later told by animal dealers that these illegally imported Scarlet macaws might then be exported from Guyana as Blue and Green macaws, a permitted species which they closely ressemble but we have no confirmation of this information. In Suriname the voluntary quota limits the export of Scarlet macaws to 100 per year. In any case, this another clear violation of CITES regulations and the Suriname Game Law as well as Guyana's animal import regulations.

We personally observed on March 6 in the coastal town of Burnside, Coronie District, 8 Brown-throated parakeets (Aratinga pertinax) and 3 Green-rumped parakeets (Forpus passerinus) being held in small handmade mesh cages. However, these species are considered "cage species", for which there are minimal requirements. The trapper that we interviewed said that some of these were being used as "callers" to trap other birds but that he had a "big" shipment awaiting pick-up by one of Suriname's main dealers. The legal trapping season for all parrots is from July 1 to December 31.

Psittacines were also being trapped out of season in the Apura area in January 2000. Two dealers and one middleman from Paramaribo were seen requesting birds from the Amerindians for pick up in Washabo.

Both LBB/NB wildlife enforcement officers and wildlife exporters acknowledge that non-CITES species shipments are not closely inspected, providing room for error and fraud.

Animal exporters in Suriname and Guyana told us the "smaller traders" smuggle birds and reptiles routinely from Guyana to Suriname and vice versa to meet their export quotas.

There are reports of sea turtles eggs, a species with a closed hunting season year-round, but an open egg collecting season in April in a limited area of the country, being smuggled from Suriname to French Guiana. However since sea turtle eggs are also poached (and protected) in Guyana and French Guiana it is hard to determine the country of origin. Sea turtle eggs that are confiscated from poachers or collected from doomed nests in Suriname and then sold legally by NB/LBB personnel to local markets should be dyed or marked to discourage the "look-alike" sale of illegally harvested eggs.

Findings and other considerations

The national legislation dealing with the environment in Suriname can be found in several separate Acts, State Resolutions and Ministerial Decrees. The responsibility for the environment and species protection is given, due to this legislation, to several ministries. This results in overlap of jurisdiction and authority with the result that most acts, compounded by the financial constraints of low budgets and inflation, are not being properly enforced. Some of these laws are antiquated like the Game Act of 1954 that was
written long before CITES existed. Amendments to the Game Act were proposed in 1982 but were not ratified. We were told that new ones were being drafted. Suriname needs an effective legal framework if it is to control its wildlife trade effectively. This will require a complete review and streamlining of its existing regulations as well as the administrative policies involved.

Realistic voluntary quota levels have been set by Suriname for both CITES and non-CITES species. Even the wildlife exporters rarely fill the quotas set for most species (Tables, 2, 3, 9, 10). Quota levels are reviewed at regular intervals by the Permit Office and reset if necessary. The Service on Import-, Export- and Foreign Exchange Control (Ministry of Commerce and Industry) also checks the FOB prices with advice from the Permit Office.

No recent scientific surveys in the wild of key export trade species such as parrots and reptiles have been made. LBB/NB has set this as a top priority in the future and requires assistance to implement this. The most recent bird survey, conducted in 1994, was funded by the Animal Exporters' Association (Schouten, K., 1995). The author is now a wildlife importer in the Netherlands. After this survey was completed some quotas were raised and some species were added to the quota list.

There is fragmented government agency oversight. Different ministries are involved in wildlife management and wildlife export from the issuing of commercial licenses to traders, licensing of traders to apply for export permits, to paying fees and taxes, to Customs controls, and finally to veterinary inspection. For instance, the export of aquarium fish is regulated by the Fisheries Department under the Ministry of Agriculture not the Permit Authority. As a result there are only cursory inspections of aquarium fish shipments. Fortunately, the aquarium trade in Suriname is minimal with only a few shipments per year.

The medicinal plant trade appears to be completely undocumented and uncontrolled ­ we received conflicting reports that "large amounts of medicinal plants were being smuggled out of Suriname on a weekly basis" while the authorities told us that "medicinal or traditional plants" were not exported "in significant quantities". We were unable to verify any of this. Marga Werkhoven of the National Herbarium reported that over 770 species of plants were being used in the medicinal plant trade. Further, she told us that large shipments of plants from the wild, used as raw materials in the making of essences and lotions, were being shipped to Holland and received only cursory inspection prior to export. In addition, there appears to be no commercial propagation of medicinal plants at this time.

Recommendations for Suriname

The export trade and permit-tracking of CITES-listed species appears to be well controlled in Suriname. The main problem with the wildlife trade in Suriname is lack of funds for enforcement -- which is minimal outside of Paramaribo. Funds are also urgently required to equip and pay enforcement personnel competitive salaries. Other problems include: updating legislation, appointing new members to re-activate the Nature Conservation Commission, and establishing communication lines with the Environmental Protection Agency and its Permit Office in Guyana.

Other recommendations include:

Revamp hunting regulations under the Game Law of 1954 as soon as possible to cover the whole of Suriname, including the territorial sea and economical zone and to protect CITES-listed species in Suriname. Set control systems, realistic bag limits, possession limits and large penalties. As part of this effort, monitor the Paramaribo and Nickerie markets for illegal bushmeat and fish and the Zorg en Hoop airport in Paramaribo.

Provide better-equipped and trained enforcement personnel. Motivated enforcement personnel should follow the Wildlife Trade Enforcement training course run by the Fish & Wildlife Service in the USA for overseas personnel.

Establish cooperative, revenue-based, community wildlife programs via consultations with stakeholders in key trapping areas such as Apura, Tepu and Kwamalasamoetoe. Already there have been good results from consultations with the Galibi communities with regard to the management of Galibi Nature Reserve. As part of this effort, fees given to trappers have been reviewed, as compared to the fees paid to middlemen, and FOB prices for desirable species.

Review long-term economic benefits that might be realized through better management techniques (including better animal husbandry) at the trapper level.

Enforcement personnel should be assigned to train local, wildlife volunteers in the trapping areas to act as contact persons and report to them detrimental activities, smuggling or trapping out of season. These volunteers may be trained further to become volunteer enforcement officers. The desired benefit is to provide communities with a greater sense of control over their wildlife and a better understanding of the harmful effects of illegal access to their resources by others. This is particularly important in an area such as Apura where illegal trappers from Guyana catch and then smuggle out wildlife, often in large quantities. The Zorg en Hoop airport in Paramaribo that services the airstrips of the interior, should be monitored by enforcement personnel for illegal wildlife shipments (captured out of season or protected species) and for commercial bushmeat shipments.

Export quotas and FOB prices set by Suriname and Guyana should be harmonized to discourage smuggling between both countries. Zero-quota or protected species of one country should not appear on the export quota list of the other. A zero-quota species is easily smuggled into the neighboring country, often just across the river, where it can be exported legally under its quota system (Tables 9, 10).

Species, which are accidental or marginal in distribution in one country, should not appear on the quota list of the other country: e.g., Blue-fronted Amazon in Guyana (an IUCN Red Data Book species). Dendrobates azureus, a protected frog in Suriname, has an export quota of 500 per year in Guyana where it occurs only in very small numbers. A species similar in appearance as D. azureus, the blue specimen of Dendrobates tinctorius, occurs in both countries. In Suriname the blue D. tinctorius is treated in the same way as D. azureus and cannot be exported for commercial purposes.

Provide annual or bi-annual audiovisual TRAFFIC presentations to update Customs and Wildlife Enforcement personnel about the international legal and illegal wildlife trade internationally. This could be done on a regional level.

Supply Customs and enforcement personnel with species ID manual illustrated with the species targeted by the wildlife and plant trade in the Guianan region.

Monitor species data and volume of the ornamental fish trade, rare woods, orchids, medicinal plants, and shark fins.

Develop or strengthen wildlife or species conservation, education and public awareness efforts.

Encourage and promote research on species that are being heavily exploited or under threat due to habitat degradation or change.

Promote the formation of collaborative arrangements between research institutions such as local and foreign universities, regional conservation programmes such as WIDECAST, non-governmental organizations such as TRAFFIC, and Government agencies responsible for wildlife trade and natural resource management.

Promote the establishment of eco-tourism programmes that focus on the non-extractive use of wildlife.

Identify alternative economic uses for wildlife that do not threaten species survival but rather enhance conservation efforts.