Intersection of drug trafficking, law enforcement and bird conservation in the Americas

An important theme of discussions during the development of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework was how conservation can be compromised by societal issues, such as land insecurity, conflict and crime. Although illegal harvesting, collection and trade are well-known threats to biodiversity, we know less about the conservation impacts of other transnational crimes and associated law enforcement activities.

Drug trafficking is an example of a social problem that is accelerating forest loss – directly through the illegal construction of roads and airstrips to move goods and indirectly through both the expansion of livestock grazing to money laundering and controlling territory and subsidizing land and resource grabbing. extraction in previously isolated regions, including protected areas and indigenous lands^1,2,3,4. Researchers used remote sensing to identify unique patterns of deforestation that can be attributed to drug trafficking and found that 15 to 30 percent of annual deforestation in Nicaragua, Honduras and Guatemala can be attributed to the movement of cocaine alone.^4.5. Deforestation hotspots also correspond spatially to traffic nodes¹, although these hotspots are continually evolving as traffickers adapt to counter-drug operations and move to increasingly isolated forested areas that hide clandestine activities. While some of this dynamic may be inevitable, the supply-side focus of national and international drug policies amplifies the cycle by neglecting the roles of unclear land tenure, weak governance and rural communities. underfunded businesses that facilitate trafficking and promote land-based money laundering. and the expansion of agro-industry^6.7.

In this brief paper, we focus on the intersection of bird ban, deforestation, and drug ban efforts to illustrate why responding effectively to the biodiversity crisis requires knowledge of complex socioecological dynamics, without which even Well-intentioned efforts to solve social problems can exacerbate biodiversity. loss. Birds are a prominent example because they play important roles in ecological communities, provide ecosystem services, and are powerful economic drivers through ecotourism and birdwatching. Deforestation poses a serious threat to Central America's resident and migratory birds, half of which have declined since 1970.⁸. Focusing on movement rather than drug cultivation, we quantified the spatial congruence of landscapes important to resident and migratory forest birds, as well as forest cover, with land likely to attract cocaine traffickers when they are displaced elsewhere by counter-narcotics activities.

Our work builds on Magliocca et al.⁷, who estimated changes in landscape suitability for cocaine trafficking after peaks in interdiction success (i.e., cocaine seizures) in Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama between 2007 and 2018 (Supplementary Figure 1). We considered interdiction in this context as operations on land (e.g., domestic patrols, security checks at airports and on highways) and maritime (e.g., interception of drug-delivery boats and supply ships ) aimed at disrupting supply chains and seizing cocaine, as the study documents. the United States Consolidated Drug Database (CCDB)⁹. Suitability was defined as the likelihood of an area becoming a future drug trafficking space after a peak in counternarcotics activities, based on socioecological attributes known to attract trafficking activities (e.g., isolation and rarity of human populations). For example, after intense police and military repression, the suitability of an area for future trafficking may change significantly.

Important landscapes (hereafter referred to as Important Bird Landscapes (IBL); Supplementary Figure 2) were identified for 196 resident and migratory forest-associated species using high-resolution data products from eBird Status and Trends (ref. ^ten; Supplementary Information), which estimate weekly relative abundance at 3 km × 3 km resolution based on millions of checklists submitted to the global eBird citizen science project.¹¹ and subjected to rigorous quality control and modeling procedures (ref. ^12.13; Additional information). We also estimated the most important breeding areas in North America and the percentage of global migratory bird populations using areas increasingly susceptible to drug trafficking activities.

As a result of peak interdiction activities, the suitability for drug trafficking increased in 69% of IBLs for tropical residents (total area of ​​IBLs is 93,253 km).²) and 62% for migratory birds (the area of ​​IBL is 124,129 km²), while only 36% and 30% of IBLs, respectively, lost relevance (Fig. 1). IBLs that increased in suitability included areas in the five great forests of Mesoamerica: the Maya Forest in Guatemala, Indio-Maiz in Nicaragua, Tortuguero in Costa Rica, and the Honduran Moskitia.

Landscapes that were comparatively more conducive to drug trafficking had slightly greater forest cover (63.2% vs. 57.7%) but encompassed much larger forest patches (Fig. 1). The patch sizes of the 20 largest forests located in areas more prone to drug trafficking were more than twice as large (mean 880,242 ha; standard deviation 1,267,768; maximum 4,421,732 ha) as those located in less favorable areas (mean of 351,772 ha; standard deviation). of 511,368; 1,979,304 ha maximum) (Supplementary Fig. 3).

More than half of the migratory species accounted for more than 25% of their global population, and 11 species, including the federally listed Golden-cheeked Warbler (Setophaga chrysoparia), had more than 50% – within IBLs which have become more adapted to drug trafficking (Supplementary Table 1). Breeding areas of migratory species using more suitable areas were most concentrated in the eastern United States and Canada, particularly in the upper Midwest, Appalachia, and lower Mississippi Valley (Fig. 2).

Our work builds on previous research that demonstrates how anti-drug strategies, which previously shifted the drug transit zone from the Caribbean to Central America, continue to push activities into isolated forested areas.^4.7. Here we provide evidence that current interdiction strategies can increase drug traffickers' use of approximately two-thirds of IBLs for species associated with Central American forests and in Central America's largest remaining forests – the so-called “five great forests” which are disproportionately inhabited by indigenous people⁷. This increased risk could have population-level consequences, particularly for migratory birds breeding in eastern North America. One in five forest-associated migratory species, including one endangered species, has more than 50% of its global population within IBLs expected to increase in suitability for drug trafficking. As narco-deforestation is a threat multiplier^4.5, the spatial convergence of areas important for bird, forest and drug trafficking represents a credible threat to biodiversity conservation. In this way, our study reinforces the idea that sociopolitical processes – in this case drug trafficking and prohibition policies – can have complex and unintended negative consequences on the environment.

Recognize the challenges and uncertainties associated with estimating clandestine phenomena⁷, our goal was not to predict future drug trafficking hotspots, but rather to expand the scope of potential collateral damage considered in the context of drug interdiction strategies and reform alternatives. Despite known problems associated with the U.S.'s long-held “supply-side” drug interdiction strategy^14.15, we recognize that there are no easy solutions. Conventional interdiction measures that emphasize seizures and arrests keep traffickers agile and their profits high, which can corrupt government actors and incentivize enriched drug traffickers to operate and transform landscapes with high biodiversity values .⁶.

Although US drug policy is not solely responsible, the region-wide supply ban has led to the spatial displacement of drug trafficking activities. More comprehensive strategies that build trust and strengthen the capacity of communities and governments to protect their lands are needed to deter drug traffickers from establishing themselves in new areas. These strategies include supporting governance institutions that can combat trafficking-related corruption, strengthening transparency and the rule of law, improving land rights, reducing poverty among indigenous communities and rural areas by supporting income streams from forests and strengthening the capacity of indigenous and rural communities. communities to protect forests¹⁶. Strengthening the capacity of indigenous groups and rural smallholders to reassert their territorial control and resource governance standards has been shown to protect against drug trafficking and other environmental crimes, such as illegal logging or wildlife poaching.¹⁷. These additional elements would benefit conservation and support peace, security and economic development, including ecotourism. Our research reinforces the message of the Global Biodiversity Framework that seemingly unrelated social issues can have serious consequences for the conservation of culture and biodiversity.