Traceability of Wildlife Trade in Ecuador

TRACEABILITY OF WILDLIFE TRADE IN ECUADOR

Traceability of wildlife trade in Ecuador

Prepared for GIZ

Authors Pablo Sinovas, Emily King and Amy Hinsley Citation Sinovas, P., King, E. and Hinsley, A. (2015). Traceability of wildlife trade in Ecuador. Technical report prepared for the Ministry of the Environment of Ecuador and the German Development Cooperation (GIZ). UNEP-WCMC. Quito, Ecuador.

Published October 2015

The United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) is the specialist biodiversity assessment centre of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the world’s foremost intergovernmental environmental organization. The Centre has been in operation for over 30 years, combining scientific research with practical policy advice.

This publication may be reproduced for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission, provided acknowledgement to the source is made. Reuse of any figures is subject to permission from the original rights holders. No use of this publication may be made for resale or any other commercial purpose without permission in writing from UNEP. Applications for permission, with a statement of purpose and extent of reproduction, should be sent to the Director, UNEP-WCMC, 219 Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, CB3 0DL, UK.

The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of UNEP, contributory organizations or editors. The designations employed and the presentations of material in this report do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP or contributory organizations, editors or publishers concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city area or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries or the designation of its name, frontiers or boundaries. The mention of a commercial entity or product in this publication does not imply endorsement by UNEP.

UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) 219 Huntingdon Road, Cambridge CB3 0DL, UK Tel: +44 1223 277314 www.unep-wcmc.org

UNEP promotes environmentally sound practices globally and in its own activities. Our distribution policy aims to reduce UNEP’s carbon footprint.

Contents

Executive Summary ...... ii 1. Introduction ...... 1 2. General considerations ...... 2 2.1 What is traceability? ...... 2 2.2 Traceability of wildlife trade ...... 2 2.3 Benefits of traceability ...... 3 2.4 Information management ...... 3 2.5 Standards ...... 4 2.6 Identification ...... 4 2.7 Custom Codes ...... 5 2.8 Detection ...... 5 2.9. Certification Schemes...... 6 3. Wildlife trade chains in Ecuador ...... 8 4. Traceability mechanisms employed in Ecuador ...... 10 4.1 Livestock ...... 10 4.2 Cocoa ...... 10 4.3 Sharks ...... 11 4.4 Timber ...... 11 5. Existing methods and technologies ...... 12 5.1 Marking Methods ...... 12 5.2 Forensic methods ...... 15 6. Taxa examples of wildlife traceability...... 23 6.1 Amphibians ...... 23 6.2 Sharks ...... 24 6.3 Timber ...... 25 6.4 Orchids...... 27 6.5 Ivory ...... 30 6.6 Rhino horn ...... 31 6.7 Vicuna...... 32 6.8 Crocodilians ...... 32 6.9 Snakes ...... 33 6.10 Fisheries ...... 34 6.11 Caviar ...... 35 6.12 Ornamental Marine Species...... 36 6.13 Queen Conch ...... 36 7. Recommendations ...... 37 References ...... 41

Executive Summary This report contributes to ongoing efforts by the Ministry of Environment of Ecuador to ensure that wildlife trade in the country is sustainable, legal and traceable, by providing an information basis in relation to wildlife trade traceability. The report presents contextual information around wildlife trade traceability; an outline of the wildlife trade chain and current practices in Ecuador; wildlife trade traceability experiences from elsewhere, including an overview of available methods; and recommendations for consideration by the Ministry of Environment.

Traceability systems can increase confidence of businesses and consumers by providing evidence of the origin and legal sourcing of products. However, for traceability systems to be effective, they need to be coupled with the necessary regulatory framework, enforcement and capacity.

The permitting requirements of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) contribute to ensuring that international wildlife trade is traceable. In addition, recognising the need for more stringent traceability, a number of additional requirements have been put in place under CITES for specific groups, including crocodile skin tagging and caviar labelling. As technological advances and better awareness facilitate the design and implementation of an increasing number of traceability options at the national, regional and global levels, the need for greater coherence and guidance on traceability, including standards and information sharing, becomes more acute.

Mapping of the trade chain is an important step in designing and applying solutions to strengthen traceability. An outline of the wildlife trade chain in Ecuador is presented in the report, along with areas that were identified as needing improvement. These areas included the lack of sufficient traceability and inspections at certain points along the chain, challenges with species identification, insufficient knowledge about the requirements by some of the stakeholders, and the lack of specific Customs sub-codes for most wildlife products in trade.

Traceability mechanisms currently in operation in Ecuador for livestock, sharks, timber and cocoa are examined in the report. Livestock is traced in a “farm to fork” system, with each animal identified by and tagged with a unique number, and information databased and updated along the trade chain. Cocoa follows a system of labelling that has produced good results. Timber traceability is based on road controls and checks of the total volume of timber being transported, supported by a dedicated information management system; however, timber is not marked and species identification checks are not performed. Shark traceability is based on records of captures and landings and some forensic checks have been introduced, although an over-arching system for managing shark traceability information is lacking.

Traceability systems normally require marking of specimens and products to allow producers to track them through the system. Marking methods include: physical and chemical marking, implants (such as visible elastomers or PIT tags), and labels ii

(including barcodes and RFID tags). Different methods will be suitable depending on their intended use; for example, PIT tags are often utilized to tag valuable specimens as they have a long battery life but are more expensive to implement than paint branding markings.

Forensic methods can be used to carry out spot checks and verification of information submitted to traceability systems, e.g. catch certificates. While metabolomics can be used to elucidate the geographic origin of specimens and whether they are wild- sourced or farmed, DNA barcoding has become the most commonly used forensic method with the decrease in cost and time in carrying out DNA analyses.

The report provides an overview of traceability experiences from around the world for products of different taxonomic groups, including crocodilians, vicuña, caviar, ivory, snakes, sharks, fisheries, timber and orchids, amongst other. For example, crocodile skins and caviar have to be marked on the basis of CITES resolutions with identifying marks or codes and their movement tracked, with crocodilians traced through to the tanning stage, while caviar is traced through the entire production chain. A similar system is currently in development for snakes, while sharks are the focus of a number of new initiatives due to the recent CITES listings at CoP16. Timber and fisheries are largely regulated through international trade legislation and voluntary certification schemes which require traceability for compliance (e.g. MSC and FSC certification); orchids are traced in some countries through national mechanisms, such as the use of GS1 codes to track orchids in Peru. Traded amphibians currently lack traceability mechanisms, but applicable methods are discussed.

Complete chain of custody traceability can be achieved through the use of frequent checks of producers and tagging of each individual/product with tamper evident or unique tags, as well as requiring transport to take place in containers sealed with a tamper evident seal. However, this is likely to require large investment of time and money, and a simpler system (albeit with less secure traceability) is also recommended, consisting of rigorous checks of breeding/propagation centers, ports, goods during transportation and at customs.

Traceability systems for wildlife in Ecuador can also be improved through the introduction of standards, such as those managed by GS1 and those implemented by CITES, as well as creation of a centralised database to allow tracking of products throughout the Ecuadorian supply chain; this will also allow enforcement officers to more easily investigate compliance. Inspection of facilities, producers and shipment should also be increased and all wild-sourced breeding stock be registered. Workshops and training sessions for breeders and producers will help them to understand regulations and increase compliance, while enforcement officers will benefit from greater knowledge of species identification and how to enforce traceability measures.

iii

1. Introduction Wildlife trade can generate important conservation and socio-economic benefits if well managed. However, overharvesting and illegal trade can reduce the availability of the resource, leading to conservation challenges and to reductions in livelihood benefits. Ecuador is a megadiverse country with a large potential for sustainable wildlife use and trade. To ensure that this trade is sustainable, legal and traceable, the Ministry of Environment of Ecuador (MAE) is assessing current wildlife trade management practices with a view to strengthening its institutional capacity and improving processes as necessary. This report contributes to those efforts by providing an information basis in relation to wildlife trade traceability. It aims to support Ecuador by providing an outline of current practices in the country and elsewhere, an overview of available methods and recommendations for consideration by the Ministry of Environment.

2. General considerations 2.1 What is traceability? A definition of traceability by the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO 9000:2000; ISO, 2000) is “the ability to trace the history, application or location of that which is under consideration”. The European Union Food Traceability Another commonly employed definition of Regulation (EC Reg. No. 178/2002) defines traceability is the “set of actions, measures and traceability as “the ability to trace and follow a technical procedures to identify and trace every food, feed, food-producing animal or substance product from its origin to the end of the intended to be, or expected to be incorporated marketing chain” (e.g. AGROCALIDAD, 2012b). into a food or feed, through all stages of production, processing and distribution”.

2.2 Traceability of wildlife trade Traceability of wildlife trade has been advanced marking recommendations for elephant tusks mostly as part of voluntary certification schemes and tusk pieces (Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev. (e.g. MSC for fisheries or FSC for forestry CoP16)), and requirements for marking of products, see section 2.9) and in the context of specimens from registered breeding operations CITES for some taxonomic groups. that breed Appendix I animal species (Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15). Under the requirements of CITES, traceability refers to recording and tracing trade from the Further, the CITES Conference of the Parties, at country of origin to the country of destination. its 16th meeting (Bangkok, 2013), adopted a This is achieved through the issuance and number of Decisions related to the traceability verification of permits or certificates that of trade in specimens of CITES-listed species, accompany shipments, the identification of including sturgeon and paddlefish (Decisions specimens and reporting of trade data in CITES 16.136 to 16.138), Queen Conch (Decisions 16.141 annual reports and the CITES trade database to 16.148), timber (Decision 16.58), elephant (CITES, 2015a). ivory (Decisions 16.78 to 16.83), and reptile skins (Decisions 16.102 to 16.108). A number of initiatives to improve traceability have been established under CITES for various In view of the multiple traceability initiatives taxonomic groups, including a universal tagging under way, including the different decisions system for the identification of crocodilian skins related to traceability adopted at CoP16, the (Resolution Conf. 11.12 (Rev. CoP15)), a universal Animals Committee, at its 28th meeting (Tel labelling system for caviar (Resolution Conf. 12.7 Aviv, 2015), invited the Standing Committee to (Rev. CoP16)), tagging requirements for trade in consider the drafting of a decision on leopard skins for personal use (Resolution Conf. traceability aimed at increasing coherence, 10.14 (Rev. CoP16)), tagging requirements for reducing duplication of effort and providing trade in markhor hunting trophies from guidance to Parties implementing traceability Pakistan (Resolution Conf. 10.15 (Rev. CoP14)), systems.

2.3 Benefits of traceability Experience from traceability systems in food  Reducing manual data entry and improving production and other sectors shows that operational efficiency (Kelepouris et al., improved traceability along the trade chain can 2006). Traceability systems can also help contribute to: generate useful commercial information such as routes and distribution, demand  Confirming the origin and legal sourcing and volume, forecasting, time in transit and of products (Norton et al., 2013); to provide rapid visibility of problems areas  Retention of existing customers (Mai et al., such as goods stuck in transit or suspicious 2010); volumes.  Increasing consumer and business These benefits can equally apply to wildlife confidence (van Rijswijk et al., 2008; traceability systems. Enhanced traceability and Norton et al., 2013); evidence of legal sourcing throughout the  Better access to markets for producers: supply chain would strengthen the implementation of CITES (Ashley, 2014). membership of certification schemes can Ultimately, improved traceability would reduce increase return on investment, e.g. organic certification (Kleemann et al., 2014); the risk of unsustainable use and of illegal trade and result in better conservation and livelihood  Increasing volume accuracy, shortens outcomes. transits time and reduces handling errors (Monette and van Bogart, 2009); However, it should be noted that improved traceability cannot totally overcome laundering  Reducing theft and creating safety and or smuggling and that corresponding quality control (Lucas et al. 2013); enforcement mechanisms are necessary (Ashley,  Validating authenticity (Lucas et al. 2013); 2014).  Improving the automation and efficiency of the delivery/receiving process (Kelepouris et al., 2006);

2.4 Information management While marking and tagging mechanisms are key Examples of commercially run databases include elements of a traceability system, for these Trace Register™ (Trace RegisterTM, 2015) and mechanisms to be effective, they should be Trace One (Trace One, 2015); traceability integrated into a coherent system that traces information is entered by each producer and can products throughout the supply chain. be shared with other companies in the supply Electronic databases can be used for this chain. Non-commercial systems also exist, such purpose and linked to the relevant marking as the EU-curated TRACES database (European methods. Parliament and Council, 2003) for monitoring the movements of animals and products of They either require each point in the supply animal origin within and into the EU. It allows chain to manually enter data or can be linked to electronic transmission of information and electronic tagging systems such as RFIDs or 1D centralised management of data, as well as and 2D barcodes. These unique identifiers can instantaneous tracing of the journey of an then be registered along the supply chain using animal or animal product. electronic scanners and data logging methods. High-volume traders may also be able to Sharing of up-to-date information on wildlife integrate their systems with an overarching trade traceability via a global information track and trace system to reduce double entry of management system would allow countries data. throughout the trade chain to verify shipments

in real-time (Ashley, 2014). CITES e-permitting been recommended as part of efforts to improve systems have been developed by several Parties traceability of snake skins (Ashley, 2014; and many more have made a commitment to do UNCTAD, 2014 and CITES, 2013a). so since the presentation of the e-permitting There may also be potential for connecting toolkit at COP15 in 2010. wildlife traceability systems to courier systems Inclusion of traceability data in CITES e- to gain additional shipping information. permitting processes would prevent a Additionally, traceability can improve the duplication of effort and increase the usefulness visibility of stocks and, alongside forecasting of information collected about each shipment. capabilities, it could be used to enhance the Inclusion of this data into the existing CITES support the assessment of future impacts of trade database would be an efficient method of trade to specific species. combining trade data from all sources and has

2.5 Standards Traceability methods can vary greatly depending organisation focussed on the development of on the specific product, region of application, standards for trade chains in multiple industries, and nature of the trade chain in question, as the most well-known of which is the barcode outlined by this report and as made evident by (GS1, 2015). Regardless of the exact traceability the variety of taxon-specific CITES decisions and methods that may be applicable to different resolutions on traceability. wildlife markets, the development of business requirement specifications and adoption of a The variety of existing methods for different framework such as the GS1 standards would taxa, the multitude of countries involved in outline international minimum requirements international wildlife trade and the need for for traceability in wildlife trade chains and coherent information management and sharing, ensure a consistent approach (GS1, 2012). highlight the need for agreed international standards for wildlife traceability, as highlighted A key benefit of an international standard for at the 28th meeting of the CITES Animals traceability is the implementation of common Committee in 2015 (AC28 Doc. 14.2.1. and AC28 identification codes to allow cross-border Com. 6). A standard can be defined as “a movement of shipments to be recorded in a document that provides requirements, common language (as done for example for specifications, guidelines or characteristics that caviar). This would also facilitate easy access to can be used consistently to ensure that national and international level data on trade, materials, products, processes and services are allowing all countries on the trade chain to track fit for their purpose” (ISO, 2015). products from source to export and to final point of sale (GS1, 2012). One of the global leaders in traceability standards is GS1, an international non-profit

2.6 Identification Species identification is a key component to materials is variable and expert knowledge is ensure traceability and that the appropriate often required to utilize them adequately. checks are applied to regulated species. Recent years have seen the development of materials to aid identification by experts and Identification is generally undertaken by expert non-experts, including electronic ID keys. For visual assessment of morphological example, iPez (Guisandea et al., 2015) is a piece characteristics, which requires varying degrees of software designed to identify fish species of training and experience depending on the based on morphometric variables entered by the taxonomic group involved. Numerous materials user, combined with further visual identification exist to help identify species, such as specialized guidance. This allows identification of 1365 fish wildlife guides, taxonomic keys or the CITES species. Accuracy has been estimated at 100%, Wiki ID manual, although the usability of these provided at least 15-20 baseline measurements

for each species have been entered. In addition, at 90%. Species identification through image suggestions have been discussed to integrate recognition has also resulted in 82-85% accuracy and facilitate the use of existing identification on a natural or varied background for moths materials (e.g. AC28 Inf. 17). (Mayo and Watson, 2007) and camera trap images of 18 species (Yu et al., 2013) or 92-93% As a further step of automation, image on a uniform background for 740 species recognition software can be developed to aid consisting of fish, butterflies and plants with the identification of some species (Hoque (Hernández-Serna and Jiménez-Segura, 2014). et al., 2011; Sherley et al., 2010; Burghardt, 2008), However, a taxonomist is still required to “train” although they do not currently exist for most the program initially, potentially for each region taxonomic groups. FAO has created iSharkFin, of occurrence due to phenotypic differences software to automatically identify shark species (Fischer, 2013). based on photos of fins (FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department, 2015). This allows Genetic analyses such as DNA barcoding (see identification of 35 shark species from dorsal section 5.2.2) can be used to reliably identify fins, with increased identification ability with species, although there are practical limitations future releases. This is not a fully automated to this method in terms of time and equipment system, as some manual specification of fin required, as well as costs. points is necessary. Accuracy has been estimated

2.7 Custom Codes The Harmonized System (HS) is an Currently, the custom code system is not well international coding language for traded suited to monitoring the trade in wildlife products managed by the World Customs products due to a lack of specificity, with many Organization (WCO). The HS is applied to 98% traded taxa included within broad HS codes (e.g. of all products in global trade, to allow ‘Reptiles’: WCO, 2012) and others lacking a code monitoring of trade volumes and traceability of entirely (e.g. amphibians: Gerson, 2012). products as they cross international borders Addressing these drawbacks has the potential to (WCO, 2015). Each group of goods is assigned a enhance monitoring of international wildlife unique six digit code, with regions and trade and strengthen traceability methods individual countries able to add additional digits (Fragoso and Ferriss, 2008), for example by to provide more detailed sub-codes (e.g. U.S providing a clear signal to Customs Officers that Government, 2013). Ecuador uses a 10 digit a shipment contains CITES listed taxa and system comprising the HS code, a two digit should be checked. This potential was Andean Community Common Tariff recognized at the 16th CITES CoP (Decision Nomenclature (NANDINA) code, and a two 16.62) and will be further discussed at the 66th digit national code (International Customs CITES Standing Committee meeting in January Tariff Bureau, 2008). 2016.

2.8 Detection This study does not aim to provide a review system and to reduce illegal trade. Existing of methods available to detect detection methods include random routine concealed wildlife in trade. inspections of shipments by trained personnel However, detection of (ideally aided by identification guides or tools), wildlife will be targeted inspections on the basis of a risk essential to assessment (e.g. based on declared contents, strengthen the sender and destination), inspections informed implementation by intelligence, x-ray machines, scanners and of any traceability sniffer dogs (Milliken, 2014).

2.9. Certification Schemes Voluntary certification schemes exist for a market accessibility and/or higher prices paid variety of wildlife products. While existing for those products. As traceability of products is schemes are varied in scope and requirements, an essential part of these schemes, i.e. to they generally result in the award of certificates, differentiate products of certified and non- e.g. permission to use the certifier´s label on origin, an overview of some of the main certified products to prove compliance with the certification schemes for fisheries, timber and scheme´s standards, often resulting in improved horticultural plants is presented below.

2.9.1 Marine Stewardship Council The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC), Currently, 373 fisheries are engaged in the established in 1996, is a global fisheries and fish programme, 265 of which are certified (108 in products certification and eco-labelling scheme. assessment). Worldwide, more than 28 000 The MSC certifies both fisheries and seafood products bear the eco-label chains of custody under two separate and can be traced back to certified schemes. The fisheries scheme is fisheries (MSC, 2015b). based around 28 performance As part of the MSC’s evaluation indicators, which assess sustainability process, stakeholders have the of fishing level, minimal opportunity to voice objections to the environmental impact, and effective certification body’s recommendations; management (MSC, 2014). The chain there have been a number of of custody scheme is based on five key objections to certifications issued by principles, including purchasing from the MSC (Christian et al., 2013; Galil et a certified supplier, identification and al., 2013). However, the MSC has used DNA segregation of certified products, traceability analysis since 2009 to verify the labelling of and recording of volumes and establishment of products and found that less than one per cent a management system for the organisation was mislabelled. On the other hand, a 2011 study (MSC, 2015). found that fish sold under MSC certification did All assessments are carried out by an not come from a certified fishery (Patagonian independent, accredited, third-party certifier. Toothfish, Dissostichus eleginoides; Marko et al., These assessors are in turn managed and 2011), although the study’s findings have been accredited by a separate organisation, criticized because of the small sample sizes and Accreditation Services International GmbH methods used (Mariani, 2011). (ASI). The standards and scheme requirements are reviewed periodically. Fisheries undergo pre- assessment evaluations and annual surveillance to assess continuing compliance post- certification. Supply chains have additional traceability checks including: DNA testing, random and short notice audits, and traceback exercises (i.e. following a product through the supply chain). Joining of the scheme entitles certified parties to use the MSC eco-label in conjunction with certification, for a royalty fee.

2.9.2 Timber certification There are a number of certification schemes that certification schemes (Eden, 2009). However, aim to identify approved timber from although FSC chain of custody requirements are sustainably managed sources (e.g. FSC, 2015; strict, they operate on the scale of each PEFC, 2015).The Forest Stewardship Council individual operation in the chain, making them (FSC) is endorsed by large environmental prone to fraud as traceability for the whole chain organizations as being the most rigorous, with is difficult to achieve (Guillery, 2011). From 2014, the strictest chain of custody requirements (FSC, the FSC have introduced an Online Claims 2015a). FSC is a third-party verification system Platform to improve and streamline traceability for sustainable timber and is therefore generally and allow rapid access to information from agreed to be more reliable and less prone to throughout the supply chain for end-consumers corruption than self-regulated or industry run (FSC, 2015b).

2.9.3 Horticultural plant certification schemes The International Trade Centre’s Standards Map FairWild scheme require physical traceability currently lists twelve certification schemes and and separation of ingredients throughout the standards that focus specifically on horticultural whole supply chain until they are blended in the plants or wild plant products (ITC, 2015). These finished product. This includes requirements to: include country-specific standards, such as the  Register deliveries/purchases in buying Ethiopia Horticultural Exporters’ Association records with the date, collectors (EHEA), the Kenya Flower Council’s name/code, collection area, quantity and sustainability standard, and FlorEcuador. The product details. The collector is issued a latter reportedly ensures social and receipt with the same information; environmental standards and sustainable production in 93 flower and plant  Ensure central processing and producers in Ecuador packing activities allow (FlorEcuador, 2015; ITC, 2015). traceability of batches; Others are international in scope,  Ensure ratio of collected such as FairWild (FairWild, 2009), quantities to final processed a third party certification scheme weight is known for every which provides standards for the processed product; sustainable trade of wild plants  Ensure labelling and record keeping allow derivatives, primarily for the food and medicinal traceability of the product back to the herbal products markets. Schemes usually collection area; and involve certification carried out by approved bodies with ongoing inspections a requirement  Ensure that if the same species is to remain certified by the scheme. For example, purchased/collected outside of the FlorEcuador certification is achieved by certification scope they are clearly inspection based on an initial checklist of 130 separated and labelled. requirements, and renewable on an annual basis The standard also provides guidance on following an audit. The majority of certified sustainability of wild harvesting and trade. nurseries grow roses but there is one, Certified collection operations, registered Ecuagenera, that specialises in orchids processors/traders and registered licensees (i.e. (FlorEcuador, 2015). Similarly, FairWild requires finished product brand holders) are also allowed annual inspections, with the certification to use the FairWild ecolabel to illustrate their requirements increasing every year in the first 5 certification, according to labelling rules. years of certification. The standards of the

3. Wildlife trade chains in Ecuador Understanding the trade chain and associated business processes is essential for the successful implementation of traceability systems. The trade chain for wildlife exports from Ecuador is summarised below and an overview is presented in Figure 1.

The species to be traded needs to initially be may be transported to its final destination, e.g. identified, for example on the basis of biological shops, within the country. These shops are characteristics that allow captive production. regularly inspected by MAE. If the specimens are The production centres (e.g. captive breeding destined for the international market, national facilities or plant nurseries) wishing to trade in transportation will end at airports, maritime wildlife need to be accredited through the ports or international land borders. presentation of relevant documentation At the points of export, authorities will require (including a management plan, management an export authorisation, including the patent and mobilisation guide) in accordance presentation of export permits and phyto/zoo- with the legislation in place. Parental stock may sanitary permits and a check by antinarcotics. need to be taken from the wild and, if the species Documentation will be checked by the Customs are listed in CITES, the Ministry of Environment Verification Units (Unidades de Verificación (MAE), as the CITES Scientific Authority, will Aduanera, UVA). Subsequent to these checks, need to make a non-detriment finding (NDF) as the specimens are released by customs part of the authorisation process. (desaduanización) and loaded for export. Once authorised, wildlife centres can undertake Some differences exist between the general production in captivity or artificial propagation. process described above and the trade chain for MAE visits the centres to ensure that fisheries and forestry products. In particular, management plans are being implemented and products in these industries originate in the sea to establish export quotas. AGROCALIDAD and the forests, respectively, and do not go (agency part of the Ministry of Agriculture, through wildlife breeding centres. Instead, for Livestock, Aquaculture and Fisheries, MAGAP) fisheries, fishing vessels need to be accredited also visits the centres to undertake phyto/zoo- and subsequently captures and landings require sanitary checks. certificates of “capture and origin” and Wildlife transported within the country needs to “monitoring and control” certificates. In be accompanied by mobilisation guides issued addition, during transportation within the by MAE. These guides will be requested by MAE country, products are often stored in

at fixed or mobile checkpoints on roads. Wildlife warehouses.

Figure 1. Overview of the trade chain for wildlife exports in Ecuador, including identified weak points. 9

4. Traceability mechanisms employed in Ecuador This section provides an overview of some of the main traceability mechanisms currently applied in Ecuador for wildlife or agricultural products, including any available information on their effectiveness or shortcomings. 4.1 Livestock The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Identificación Oficial – DIO) and a Unique Aquaculture and Fisheries (MAGAP) Animal Registration (Registro Único Animal – implemented an Animal Identification and RUA) document. The DIOs consist of a tag with Traceability System (Sistema de Identificación y a unique number, as well as a RFID button-type Trazabilidad Animal, SITA) in 2012 (MAGAP, device coded with that same number. The tag- 2012) through Ministerial Agreement 041, making companies must be approved by the published in the Official Register No. 698 of 8 government and provide monthly updates on May 2012. the orders placed and delivery of tags. An initial investment of USD 7.4 million was Livestock breeders, upon tagging the animals, made into the system, with 80% being financed must provide the information to SITA, either via by the Ecuadorian government and 20% by an online database (AGROCALIDAD, 2015) or at producers. offices authorised by AGROCALIDAD. Information recorded includes the numerical The system aims to identify livestock in the code and the livestock´s date of birth, sex and country from birth to death, support health breed. checks, reduce the risk to humans of zoonotic diseases, improve food safety, and reduce the Transported livestock must be marked with a risk of livestock theft. Implementation of the DIO device and be included in the database. The system was updated in 2015 through Resolution animals must also be transported with a 0033, published in the Official Register 543 of 14 transportation document (“guía de July 2015, when AGROCALIDAD updated the movilización”) that includes the official tagging requirements to include a RFID button- identification code. AGROCALIDAD and the type device. National Police (“Policía Nacional”) are responsible for requesting and verifying this The SITA encompasses a database to allow documentation at livestock fairs and at participants of the supply chain (including checkpoints. MAGAP provincial offices, AGROCALIDAD, livestock breeder associations, abattoirs, trade Once the animals are slaughtered, fairs, checkpoints and livestock breeders) to AGROCALIDAD officers will invalidate (dar de enter and update information at key stages along baja) the devices and enter the information in the chain. the database. Animals are identified through an Official Identification Device (Dispositivo de

4.2 Cocoa In 2012, Ecuador introduced the requirement for a traceability system to be applied to the entire cocoa value chain in the country (AGROCALIDAD, 2012a). The cocoa traceability process, implemented by AGROCALIDAD,

seeks to guarantee the origin and quality of the Cocoa bean sacks are labelled with a regular product, including to protect the “fine” (“fino de label at the collecting centres containing aroma”) cocoa type by reducing the mixture information on the producers at the place of with “bulk” cocoa beans (AGROCALIDAD, origin. The system has reportedly resulted in a 2014). reduction of the level of mixture of fine and bulk cocoa at the point of export (Manrique, V. pers. The process involves: comm. 2015). A system of punishment for non-  Registration and certification of nurseries compliance may have helped achieve this and plant breeders, following an inspection success. by AGROCALIDAD at the request of the As of 2014, there were 290 cocoa nurseries, 212 interested party. AGROCALIDAD will issue collecting centres and warehouses, and 68 transportation documents (“guías de exporters registered with AGROCALIDAD movilización”) for the plant materials or (AGROCALIDAD, 2014). nurseries that have been inspected, registered and certified as plague-free; Additional measures to ensure traceability were considered, including the use of genetic  Registration of cocoa bean collecting (microsatellite) analysis to assess the beans and centres (centros de acopio) and warehouses the use of barcodes and QR codes to label the (bodegas); and sacks. However, due to costs and to the fact that  Certification of the cocoa beans to be the simpler labelling system currently in use has exported, following inspection and analysis achieve the desired reduction in mixing of fine of the physical quality of the beans by a and bulk beans, these additional methods have third-party verifying company not been implemented to date (Manrique, V. (“verificadora”) supervised by pers. comm. 2015). AGROCALIDAD.

4.3 Sharks The Fisheries Department (Subsecretaría de Despite these advances, no system is currently Recursos Pesqueros) manages a system, available to adequately manage and automate currently linked to the Single Window for traceability relevant information (e.g. catch size, Exports (“Ventanilla Única Ecuatoriana de landing location, etc.). Coordination with Comercio Exterior”, VUE), to control landings environmental police and with other and to undertake inspections through institutions was also considered to need mobilisation guides, weighting of fins and improvement and the high cost of primers genetic analyses. The activity of fishing vessels is represents a challenge in terms of ongoing controlled through satellite monitoring devices, genetic tests. fishing records and on-board observers.

4.4 Timber MAE manages the Forestry Administration timber being transported is recorded, the timber System (Sistema de Administración Forestal, itself is not marked. Therefore there is the SAF) to improve the traceability of timber potential for changes in which species are being through the recording of relevant information in transported to go undetected as long as the total mobilisation guides. While the total volume of volume of shipments is not altered.

5. Existing methods and technologies Traceability systems require the ability to track specimens/products within one production sector (internal traceability) and throughout the supply chain (external traceability). In terms of the methods used to achieve traceability, these can be broadly categorized into two distinct approaches: continuous supply chain monitoring and forensic analysis. Products can be continuously tracked along identification and analysis of fat content, the supply chain via marking methods protein and stable isotope; this can verify (including physical, chemical and particle information on, for example, customs marks and implants) or electronic tags documents or catch data. These methods (such as RFIDs), often combined with a are described in detail below, and their code based identification system. The suitability for amphibians, sharks and identity or origin (e.g. wild caught vs. orchids, which are priority groups for trade farmed or captive bred) of specimens can in management in Ecuador, is detailed in some cases also be elicited through forensic Table 1. methods including DNA barcoding, visual

5.1 Marking Methods 5.1.1 Physical marking The use of physical marking of products or low as only paint or simple equipment (e.g. specimens with a unique identifying mark or brands, tattoo guns, clippers, etc.) need be code is one of the simplest and most widely used purchased. In order for such marks to form part methods of traceability in global business of a traceability system, standards of application (Bechini et al., 2008). External marks can be need to be created and staff trained in them to colour based (e.g. dyes, bleach, inks, paints, ensure consistency and ease of recognition. fluorescent pigment) or physical alterations to However, it should be considered that when the specimens (e.g. tattoos, tags, branding, tissue end product is a whole specimen the use of removal). Colour based marks can often be non- physical marks may devalue the product and permanent, while physical alterations are there may be survivability implications for live usually non-removable (with the exception of specimens. Physical marks can also be easily some reptiles and amphibians which may counterfeited if the same code or marking regenerate tissue; Silvy et al., 2012). Such marks procedure is used by those wishing to launder are easy to apply, and associated costs will be products.

5.1.2 Chemical markers Chemicals can be either ingested or implanted colour change and can be detected by chemical into specimens or products to cause internal analysis within 24 hours and persist for several

weeks (Silvy et al., 2012). Costs for chemicals that marking some products. Some chemical tags colour organs are low as visual analysis is rapid have adverse effects on the growth and and low effort, but chemical analysis will require development of individuals (Hobbs et al., 2012). basic laboratory equipment and a trained Rhodamine B is currently used to assess bait technician. The use of chemical tags may also uptake in species including raccoons, badgers render food products unfit for human and wild pigs (Palphramand et al., 2011; Beasley consumption, making them unsuitable for et al., 2015; Fry et al., 2010).

5.1.3 Particle markers Particle markers are microscopic particles, such since then. Some training in detection is also as microtaggants®, which are comprised of necessary, including where to look for tags. As specific combinations of materials (Microtrace, tags can be produced with customized 2015). Microtaggants® are multi-coloured plastic combinations of materials they are difficult to particles between 0.075mm and 1.2mm replicate (Duong et al., 2014a). The tags in size that are used to produce can also be used in combination with unique codes (Garrett, 1996). They a code based system, such as QR can be either applied externally codes to enable tags to contain via a spray applicator, ingested or larger amounts of information incorporated into paint or (Han et al., 2012; Selimović et al., directly into products; they can be 2013). A more recent technology read either with a x100 pocket employs nanoparticles as “covert” microscope, UV light or laser pen, markers, which can be detected depending on the composition of with thermal analysis (Duong et al., the particles (Tzoulis et al., 2014; 2014b); implementation costs will be Microtrace, 2015). In 2002, costs were high as the technology is relatively recent. A US$145 for 8 oz. bottle of microtaggants® in clear similar approach is chemical tracer paint, which lacquer (1,000 applications), $30 for spray is less expensive, requires less training to use but applicator and $20 for a microscope (Brack et al which cannot provide information about origin 2002), although they are likely to have decreased (Brack et al., 2002).

5.1.4 Visible Implants (VIs) VI Elastomers (VIEs) are a silicone based both tag types can be enhanced by using implant that are injected into specimens as a fluorescent versions and a UV light. Implants do liquid and dries to a not affect growth rates in fish (Beukers et al., solid, inert 1995; Park et al., 2013; Younk et al., 2010; Simon marker. They and Dörner, 2011; Soula et al., 2012), crustaceans are usually (Dinh et al., 2012) or amphibians (Sapsford et al., available in a 2014), although tags can have lower persistency variety of rates across life stages in the latter (Bainbridge colours and et al., 2015). Computer programs can be used to are visible generate combinations of unique marks to with the naked maximize the number of eye. Code combinations patterns can be and reduce created by combining multiple, different errors coloured tags. VI alpha tags are similar to VIEs, (MacNeil et but contain letter and number codes written on al., 2011). the tags, rather than colour codes. Detection of

5.1.5 Barcodes Barcodes are a visual representation of data set up to allow consumers to see the supply readable by a scanner, and can be linear (a chain for their product (e.g. see ThisFish in “traditional” barcode) or 2D (e.g. QR codes). The Section 6.10). However, public availability of latter can represent more data in the same area. coding conventions (e.g. Caviar country codes) They can carry information on catch area, may make laundering production method, slaughter date, etc. easier. In addition, Barcodes have the advantage of potentially labels could be moved carrying a large amount of information by, for or applied products example, linking to a database with catch to other than those information or by directly containing codes for identified (Migone fishery, catch size, etc. Costs are mainly due to and Howlett, 2012). establishment time costs for training and creation of a coding convention, as well as purchasing barcode readers. Systems can also be

5.1.6 Radio-frequency identification (RFID) Many industries are moving away from to products and can withstand adverse traditional barcodes and towards the use of new environmental conditions (Singh et al., 2010). technology to streamline traceability. In RFID, A simple RFID tag costs between 7 and 15 US information such as origin and product name is cents and readers can cost up to US$500 (RFID stored on a microchip attached to an antenna Journal LLC, 2015). They can carry a large that transmits information to specialized amount of information and be updated with devices (RFID Journal LLC, 2015). When tags information from each stage in the supply chain. contain a battery (“active” tags), this In order to reduce laundering and re-use of tags transmission can be automated on illegal products, tags need to be so that information is inserted/applied to products in such a way so as gathered as products to prevent removal. RFID tags are also pass through check- potentially vulnerable to security breaches points; receivers (Khor et al., 2011; Bogari et al., 2012). can have a range of <3-100m, Tags and sensors can also be integrated into depending on the packaging directly, giving so called “smart frequency of the tag packaging” (Kang et al., 2014); data stored within (RFID Journal LLC, the packaging fabric can then be detected via a 2015). Active RFIDs are smart phone or similar device. However, this is usually applied externally likely to be better suited to high value products due to the high cost of the emerging technology.

5.1.7 Passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags Passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags are a between 3-9 inches for a handheld reader form of RFID that do not contain a battery and (Biomark, 2015), and systems have been used to only transmit information when activated by a automatically detect marked live individuals scanner. PIT tags can last up to 75 years as they including salmon (Riley et al., 2010), have no internal battery and are therefore hummingbirds (Hou et al., 2015), taiko (Taylor et usually used internally in specimens, applied al., 2012), and flying squirrels (Garroway et al., using a specialized applicator. PIT tags can also 2012). PIT tags are widely used in domestic be remotely applied to larger animals, as shown animal tagging and ecological studies (Sato et with Cervidae species (Walter et al., 2012). PIT al., 2013; Suselbeek et al., 2013; Evans et al., 2012). tags can be detected over a variable range Intravenous PIT tags have been demonstrated to depending on the tag size, although usually not greatly affect survival or growth of fish

(Cousin et al., 2012; Soula et al., 2012; Burdick, al., 2014a). PIT tags 2011) or sparrows (Schroeder et al., 2011), are cheaper than although the use of PIT tags in frogs can disrupt active RFID tags as the skin bacterial community for up to two they do not contain a weeks with unknown consequences (Antwis et battery.

5.1.8 Tamper evident seals and boxes High value or risk products (e.g. nuclear product, and so may not be suitable for transport material, cash, medical samples, ballot boxes, of live specimens unless bespoke packages etc.) are usually transported in secure systems allowing airflow are purchased. using tamper evident containers and seals. There is also interest in cross-over applications However, tamper evident seals are not sufficient for preventing food contamination in transport in themselves; regulatory officials must also (Koziol and Hoaglund, 2005; Morris, 2010). know how to ascertain if seals have been Tags can be labels or tags which have tampered with, requiring training and to be destroyed or defaced to be the creation of a checking protocol removed, thus indicating if (Johnston, 1997; Appel, 2011). tampering has been attempted. These can also contain product Single use tags with tamper codes or barcodes to link seals to resistant mechanisms are required product tracking systems; for crocodilian and Leopard electronic seals contain an RFID (Panthera pardus) under CITES chip and are designed to be resolutions 11.12 and 10.14 destroyed upon removal (Min and respectively (CITES, 2010b, 2013c); Park, 2007; Ziai and Batchelor, 2014). these must also contain a unique reference code containing details of country of Depending on the level of security of the tag and origin, year of take, etc. (see section 6.8 for the quantity ordered prices can range from further details). While manufacturers must approx. GB£0.05/unit for a brittle plastic tag to agree to not produce tags to the same GB£5.37/unit for a steel cable tag (Versapak, specifications for non-approved purchasers, tags 2015). Containers themselves can also be made can be stolen (as in Mozambique in 2007; CITES, tamper evident and are often used for food 2008b). packaging; however these are sealed around the

5.2 Forensic methods 5.2.1 Visual Identification Individuals can be identified using automatic (pigs, Kashiha et al., 2013) to 97% (penguins, image recognition software, a technique that has Sherley et al., 2010). Programs have to be initially been developed for specimens including live “trained” to identify regions of interest on penguins (Sherley et al., 2010), newts (Hoque et images, e.g. coat patterns (Hoque et al., 2011; al., 2011) and reptile skins (RESP, 2015). Sherley et al., 2010); meaning that development Automated recognition can also be based on of an automatic identification program for a new artificial marks (e.g. pigs with painted patterns, species is likely to be costly. Kashiha et al., 2013). Accuracy varies from 89%

5.2.2 DNA Barcoding DNA barcoding involves the analysis of short chloroplast for plants), extracted from specimen DNA sections from a standardized region of the tissue samples (see Fig. 7). It can be used to genome (usually a region in the mitochondrial identify species and even populations and cytochrome c oxidase I gene, COI, for animals, or the matK and rbcL gene regions in the

Samples collected DNA extracted DNA amplified with primers

DNA Barcoding

DNA barcode match generated

DNA sequenced

DNA sequence compared to a reference database Fig. 7. DNA barcoding process. individuals, depending on the specificity of the a species in the database it should be possible to reference samples used for comparison (Ogden identify to population/stock level, as done for, et al., 2009). DNA is amplified using PCR among others, Scalloped Hammerhead sharks (polymerase chain reaction) and the PCR (Chapman et al., 2009). However, as mtDNA product is sequenced using a method such as only contains the matrilineal lineage, there is Sanger sequencing or next-generation methods limited interpretation of species when (a variety of newer methods for sequencing) hybridisation is common (Carvalho et al., 2011). (Ivanova et al., 2009). Costs for DNA barcoding can be approximately As DNA analysis has become cheaper and more two to three times greater than the cost of rapid, its use as a traceability verification morphological identification (US$7.50) if the method has become more widespread. Sanger method for sequencing DNA is used Numerous studies have used the freely (currently the more common method); next- accessible DNA sequence databases BOLD generation sequencing is cheaper and faster (BOLD Systems, 2014) and GenBank (NCBI, (US$0.5-2 per specimen; Stein et al., 2014). With 2015) to verify information provided on product trained staff and lab equipment including a PCR labels (e.g. Maralit et al., 2013). Highly species- machine large number of samples can be specific tests are now possible with species- analysed quickly. For wildlife, DNA barcoding is specific primers (Helyar et al., 2014), although currently mainly used in traceability of rhino this is dependent on the range of species-specific horn (RhODIS, 2015) and elephant ivory (Wasser data in the databases; if there is enough data on et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2013).

5.2.3 Metabolomic analysis Analysis of cell contents, such as lipids and Analysing the protein expression of individuals protein can allow the diet, growing conditions or (i.e. the proteome) can reveal information about geographical origin of an individual to be geographical origin and potentially whether inferred.. Analysis of body fat in storage specimens are wild or farmed. Analysis requires compartments can be used to identify whether standard molecular biology lab equipment and specimens are wild sourced or captive bred, as software for gel analysis, as well as trained farmed individuals will often have higher fat personnel and previous analysis to determine content and this can be assessed using gas markers of interest. However, once initial chromatography (Martinez, 2005). Commercial markers have been identified antibodies can be companies carry out these types of analysis for used to allow detection via easier methods (e.g. US$20-600 per sample (Science Exchange, 2015); ELISA based analysis). Commercial companies purchasing the equipment can cost several will carry out these analyses for US$250-400 thousands of US dollars (Conquer Scientific, (Alphalyse, 2015). Current uses include 2015) and requires staff trained in its use. The detection of genetically modified organisms process also requires toxic compounds and (Miraglia et al., 2004), species in meat products reference samples for comparison (Martinez, (Flaudrops et al., 2015) and seafood (Martinez 2005). This process has been used to determine and Jakobsen Friis, 2004). Application of origin of, inter alia, fish (Martín-Pérez et al., metabolomics to wildlife traceability has thus far 2011), cheese (Pillonel et al., 2002) and diet of been limited to a few studies, mainly in fisheries, beef cattle (Serrano et al., 2007). but has shown success in an investigation of traded bear bile (Coghlan et al., 2012).

5.2.4 Stable Isotope Analysis The composition of stable isotopes in elements This can be done by commercial companies, but can vary between geographical locations turnaround time can be lengthy (up to 12 (Ziegler et al., 1976) and analysis of weeks at some facilities: UC Davis these ratios via mass Stable Isotope Facility, 2015). A spectrometry can indicate the database of reference samples geographical origin of a to compare analysed samples sample. Mass spectrometry against is also required. Stable requires samples to be fully isotope anlaysis has been used dried, ground to a fine to investiagte origin of powder, weighed and suspected illegal cycads encapsulated in special tin (Retief et al., 2014) and ivory capsules. This is not a sterile (Singh et al., 2006), as well as process so does not require a lab traceability of agricultural but does require some specialist products, e.g. fruit (Camin et al., equipment. Trained personenel and a 2011), vanilla (Hansen et al., 2014a) and well equipped laboratory, with an isotope ratio cattle (Guo et al., 2010). mass spectrometer are required for analysis.

Table 1. Summary of key criteria for different traceability methods.

Relative Relative Relative Suitability for Type ease of Suitability for sharks Suitability for orchids cost reliability amphibians use Marking Methods

Only suitable if carcasses are landed whole or if each product is marked individually. The latter may be prohibitively expensive in terms of time, unless Physical alterations to batches are tagged. A live specimens, e.g. number of organizations branding, are likely to also currently carry out cause devaluation or be tagging of sharks as deleterious to health and part of research into Physical marking Low Easy Low be rejected by breeders. individual movements As orchids are mainly sold as Some products, e.g. (e.g. NOAA fisheries whole specimens, any form of frogs’ legs, are for service, UK Shark physical marking may devalue human consumption, Tagging Programme). the specimen and thus meet excluding the use of These mainly use opposition from cultivators. colour markers. All plastic tags for whole methods could also be individuals. After mimicked by those processing, such seeking to launder wild- tags/marks are likely to sourced individuals as be removed, and other captive bred. systems may be necessary.

Chemical markers may Medium Low - make any products (e.g. Chemical marking Low - Hard Medium fins) unsuitable for human consumption.

Relative Relative Relative Suitability for Type ease of Suitability for sharks Suitability for orchids cost reliability amphibians use

Unlikely to be possible to Only suitable if apply to the animal carcasses are landed Internal markers may be externally – ingestion of whole or if each product preferable but site of application Low - Easy - Medium - particles likely to be is marked individually. Particle markers would be important, as leaves or Medium Medium High short term. Implanting The latter may be roots of many species can be under the skin may be a prohibitively expensive, removed easily. possibility (see Visible unless batches are implants). marked.

VIEs are widely used in Only suitable if amphibian and reptile carcasses are landed tagging, but the whole or if each product relatively short longevity Although internal markers may is marked individually. Low - means that such marks be preferable, if codes or color- Visible implants Low Easy The relatively short Medium would have to be based marks were prominent longevity means that reapplied periodically, then this may devalue the plant. such marks would have and may potentially to be reapplied devalue the animal for periodically. collectors.

QR codes already used in the Taiwanese orchid industry (Hu, 2009). Suitable for tracking processed specimens, e.g. Low - batches of product identified with unique codes (as GS1 (GTIN) used in Peru (Agro Barcodes Low Easy Medium already done for caviar), or containers with live Oriente Viveros). specimens. However, labels could be removed and attached to wild sourced plants.

Relative Relative Relative Suitability for Type ease of Suitability for sharks Suitability for orchids cost reliability amphibians use

RFID tags have been implanted Suitable for tracking processed specimens, e.g. into plant tissue to prevent Easy - Medium - RFID Tags Medium batches of product identified with unique codes. laundering, but could cause Medium High Already done for processed fish (see Box 2 below). infection/damage (Luvisi et al., 2010a).

PIT tags have been used to PIT tags can be implanted under the skin. Would protect cycads at risk of being Low- Easy - Medium - also need to be combined with a specific coding PIT Tags stolen from botanic gardens, so Medium Medium High system to ensure that specimens can be traced to a their use in plants is possible specific breeder/origin. (Roberts, 2015).

Forensic Methods

Only 3,952 out of 26,000 species in the BOLD database. Would need to establish reference database for every 893 shark taxa with 2,962 amphibian taxa species and population. barcodes in the BOLD with barcodes in the Although possible on a small database, providing a BOLD database, scale (already been done for Medium – Medium basis for DNA DNA barcoding High providing a basis for orchids in Mexico (Sosa et al., High - Hard traceability. Being DNA traceability. Would 2013), likely to be time trialed in Singapore as a need to establish consuming and costly, so verification of declared reference database. potentially more suited to broad- species on shipments. scale discrimination between CITES appendix I vs. CITES appendix II genera, for example (Salas et al., 2007).

Relative Relative Relative Suitability for Type ease of Suitability for sharks Suitability for orchids cost reliability amphibians use

Theoretically possible, though little evidence of past use. Would require creation of a reference database and use of special feeds by Unlikely to be applicable breeders; as captive as main use is for bred amphibians are determining wild vs. mostly fed live food (i.e. captive sourced and insects) it would sharks are mainly wild

presumably be difficult to caught. Protein or achieve sufficient enzyme analysis may The first study of the use of distinction from wild Metabolomic Medium - be of use in determining metabolomics to differentiate High Hard specimens. Metabolomic analysis High geographic origin if between wild and cultivated analysis has been reference samples can orchids, and of orchids of carried out on be built up and these different genera is underway at amphibians as part of show geographic the University of Kent, UK endocrinology studies differences in protein (Hinsley, 2015). (Helbing et al., 2010) but expression; this has the amount of tissue been shown in some sample needed for fish stocks (Martin- analysis would possibly perez et al., 2013; require large tissue Gonzalez et al., 2010; biopsies or destructive Kanerva et al., 2014). sampling. In its current form this method would be inappropriate for trade traceability.

Relative Relative Relative Suitability for Type ease of Suitability for sharks Suitability for orchids cost reliability amphibians use

Stable isotope analysis is possible for Has been used to amphibians (Fenolio et identify geographical al., 2006) but requires origin of tuna (Secor, Preliminary results of a large samples, e.g. 2002) and spiny dogfish University of Kent study suggest whole tadpoles, so Stable isotope Medium - (Andrews and Foy, that detectable differences are High Hard inappropriate for living analysis High 2009). Could therefore highly variable between genera; animals. May be be carried out for shark may need to establish reference applicable to forensic populations with database. study of dead individuals collection of suitable but a reference references. database would be required.

6. Taxa examples of wildlife traceability This section provides an overview of some of the main traceability mechanisms applied to different wildlife products globally, including any available information on their effectiveness or shortcomings. 6.1 Amphibians The Trade and Policy working group of the IUCN/SSC Amphibian Specialist Group identify a lack of traceability in amphibian trade as a “major constraint to effective conservation”, particularly a lack of methods to differentiate between wild and captive bred individuals (IUCN ASG, 2015). Despite a lack of traceability methods in current use for traded amphibians there are several methods developed in other areas of herpetological research that could have applications for traceability.

6.1.1 Pattern mapping Identification of individual animals using can be made. The technique has been shown to unique patterns has been widely used in successfully identify individual frogs (Bradfield, amphibian research, primarily for the 2004), salamanders (Gamble et al., 2008), and identification of individuals in mark-recapture newts (Hoque et al., 2011), and discriminate studies (Arntzen et al., 2004; Jehle and Hödl, between species of toads (Vörös et al., 2007). The 1998). The method is very low-cost and pairing method is limited to those amphibians with it with automatic image recognition software unique marking patterns. can increase the speed at which identification

6.1.2 Physical marks Marking methods used in amphibian research, produce identifiable marks, known as ‘toe such as branding and tattooing, are effective for clipping’. It is also the most low cost and individual identification but would be unlikely widespread method of marking amphibians for to be used for trade traceability, due to the long research (Guimarães et al., 2014). The technique term effect on the appearance of the animal. is most effective over short periods as amphibian One technique which results in relatively short tissue often regenerates; in one experiment toe term changes to appearance in some species is clipping was found to produce marks readable the removal of toes in a set combination to for a period of 100 days (Johnson et al., 2009). There are some ethical concerns over the use of toe clipping, which has been found to significantly reduce survival (Mccarthy and Parris, 2004; Johnson et al., 2009). For trade traceability, this technique may have some application for monitoring individuals through the trade chain and, due to tissue regeneration seen in a lot of species, would not have long term effects on the appearance of the animal. However, no specialist equipment is required to carry out toe clipping, so the method could easily be applied to wild individuals for laundering purposes.

6.1.3 Visible Implant Elastomers (VIEs) Visible Implant Elastomers (VIEs) are widely persistence of VIE marking has been found to be used in amphibian research, primarily for marginally better than toe clipping (Johnson et population studies. They are suitable for use in a al., 2009), with the added benefit that survival range of different species and have had wide and fitness of marked individuals appear to be application in frogs (Sapsford et al., 2014) and unaffected (Antwis et al., 2014b; Sapsford et al., salamanders (Phillips and Fries, 2009). The 2014).

6.1.4 Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tags PIT tagging is a commonly used marking potential problems with the tag migrating and method for research on a wide range of becoming difficult to find but this is less likely in mammals, reptiles, fish and amphibians smaller animals (Gibbons and Andrews, 2004). (Gibbons and Andrews, 2004). They are simple Finally, PIT tags must be injected or surgically to use and to read but can be expensive to inserted, meaning that the animals must be in purchase (Gibbons and Andrews, 2004). good health prior to implantation, to ensure that Additionally, the size of most PIT tags makes the invasive procedure does not cause added them unsuitable for use on very small stress (Gibbons and Andrews, 2004). individuals (Funk et al., 2005). There are

6.1.5 Alkaloid content Over 800 alkaloids have been found in the skin individuals from different locations (Mina et al., secretions of different amphibian species, many 2015; Andriamaharavo et al., 2015) and between of which use these and other chemicals as a wild and captive bred frogs (Daly et al., 1980). defence mechanism (Daly et al., 2005). Whereas Whilst this has yet to be used as a systematic other chemical secretions are biosynthesized, method of traceability it has potential for alkaloids are derived from arthropods in the determining the origin of amphibians in trade, individual’s diet (Saporito et al., 2009; Daly et al., as non-lethal methods of collecting secretions 2005). The amount and type of alkaloids has exist (e.g. Tyler et al., 1992). been shown to differ significantly between

6.1.6 DNA barcoding Amphibian DNA is easy to obtain from either there are 2,962 amphibian species with barcodes toe-clips (Funk et al., 2005) or skin swabs in the Barcode of Life Data System (BOLD) (Prunier et al., 2012) and ‘Cold Code’, a project to (Ratnasingham and Hebert, 2007), including DNA barcode all species of amphibians, was 569 collections of amphibian DNA from Ecuador initiated in 2013 (Murphy et al., 2013). Currently, (BOLD Systems, 2015).

6.2 Sharks Due to the nature of shark capture and sale, traceability schemes (which are covered difficulties exist with enacting traceability to a elsewhere in this document). level to comply with the CITES CoP16 shark and To facilitate species identification and help trace ray listings, including difficulty in identifying or the origin of specimens, several countries have tracing species and parts in trade, mixed banned shark finning, i.e. the removal of shark shipments of fins, etc. Guidance on potential fins from carcasses on board ships (HSI, 2014). ways to overcome these issues is detailed by Mundy-Taylor and Crook (2013), including lists Two shark fisheries have been certified by the of identification guides, guidance on carrying MSC: the British Columbia Spiny Dogfish out DNA barcoding for shark species, lists of (Squalus suckleyi) fishery in 2011 and the US shark product custom codes and existing Atlantic Spiny Dogfish (Squalus acanthias) 24

fishery in 2012 (MSC, 2011, 2012). A further BOLD database, which could allow for DNA fishery is in assessment, the blue shark (Prionace analysis of specimens. glauca) Spanish longline fishery (scheduled for Singapore’s Agri-Food and Vet Authority (AVA) completion December 2015). Shark finning is has implemented a trial traceability system currently prohibited by the MSC. based on DNA analysis, involving sampling of fin A number of studies have been carried out shipments to verify that the species declared by demonstrating the feasibility of assessing the importers is correct (Singapore AVA, 2015). origin of shark species or products on sale using In 2014, WWF and TRAFFIC launched an DNA barcoding (Barbuto et al., 2010; Hidalgo initiative (Sharks: Restoring the Balance) aiming Manosalvas, 2013; Mateo Calderón, 2014), in to, inter alia, develop and test a shark product some cases to the ocean region level (Chapman traceability mechanism (SharkTrack; WWF and et al., 2009). There are currently 893 TRAFFIC, 2014). This is not yet ready for use. elasmobranch species with barcodes in the

6.3 Timber In addition to tracking logs throughout the supply chain, identification of species and geographical origin of logs in shipments are priorities for forensic analysis of laundered illegal wood in legal shipments. One of the most important factors to consider is a common standard for traceability, due to the international nature of the timber trade (Anastasiadou et al., 2014). A number of traceability methods for timber are described below.

6.3.1 Code-based methods Different types of code-based marking have Andreopoulou, 2013). These methods are low traditionally been the most commonly used cost and simple to apply but easily counterfeited methods for timber due, primarily, to the and several methods must be applied in challenges presented by the manufacturing combination to provide comprehensive and process to the use of other methods (Tzoulis et reliable tracking information (Dykstra et al., al., 2014). The use of chisels and paint to apply 2002). Plastic barcodes may overcome some serial numbers (Seidel et al., 2012) or colour counterfeiting problems but may still become codes (Smith, 2001; Tzoulis et al., 2014) to each detached during timber processing (Seidel et al., log is widespread. Similarly, plastic tags attached 2012). In addition, plastic tags were found to be directly to the timber can provide identification ineffective in community managed forests in of individual logs throughout the supply chain Cameroon due to the difficulty in tracking (Seidel et al., 2012). These tags have included the timber that is sawn in situ rather than processed use of QR codes for tracking timber (Tzoulis and at sawmills (Bobo et al., 2011).

6.3.2 Physical appearance/descriptions An approach that uses physical features to track laundering by preventing the substitution of individual products is the CIRAD-Forêt method, logs within a shipment (Tzoulis et al., 2014). which involves taking measurements of log Other approaches include the use of automated diameters and length, and producing sketches of identification of wood grain at the cut end of ring patterns and other features (Brack et al., logs to carry out ‘fingerprinting’ in which an 2002). This method, although labour-intensive, algorithm is used to allow individual has been found to be a low-cost and effective identification of logs from scans and approach in Southeast Asia (Brack et al., 2002) measurement data (Flodin et al., 2008). and has the advantage of reducing the chance of

6.3.3 Software to improve inspection Software known as ‘CITESwoodID’ has been the capacity of those inspecting timber developed to provide clear identification keys shipments to identify mislabelled wood of CITES for significant CITES listed timber species listed species and differentiated it from similar (Richter et al., 2015). This key aims to increase species.

6.3.4 RFID The method has a very high potential for use in information (Torres, 2013; Torres, 2015). RFID timber traceability, as tags can be inserted into tags have also been adopted in Malaysia, to map wood to prevent removal for laundering all timber trees in a forest and trace them purposes (Brack et al., 2002). Traceability using throughout the supply chain (Clary, 2009). a combination of RFID, satellite geo-referencing Finally, RFID tags used in combination with of trees and barcode label has been piloted automatic load recognition of logging trucks has successfully in Peru (Torres, 2013). The project been suggested to be effective, providing there is found that the key to successful traceability was standardization of codes used and a centralized the use of Electronic Product Codes (EPCs) and database of tracking information (Anastasiadou open source software for reading RFID et al., 2014).

6.3.5 Genetic methods Although it is possible to extract DNA from all trees in sustainably managed forests and re- timber products, including processed wood (Asif sample logs throughout the supply-chain to and Cannon, 2005) it can often be difficult to ensure that laundering is not taking place extract enough material for analysis and the (Ogden et al., 2009). This use of DNA methods process can be time-consuming (Nielsen and to identify individual trees is part of the Kjær, 2008; Dormontt et al., 2015). In spite of CertiSource certification system for forests and this, DNA analysis has been used successfully to sawmills (CertiSource, 2015) and, although identify species or genera that are important in optional, has been popular with importing trade, such as CITES listed species of mahogany countries such as Australia (Chatham House, (Muellner et al., 2011). In addition to taxonomic 2007). One drawback of this approach is that identification, it is also possible to use genetic microsatellite markers for each species would methods to identify geographic origin of timber need to be developed (Nielsen and Kjær, 2008), (Nielsen and Kjær, 2008). Both approaches although markers for many common timber require reference databases to be established of species are already available (Lin Goh, 2015). In high quality and spatial resolution and which Indonesia, the price of the whole certification can be costly (Degen and Fladung, 2008). scheme was $4000 for initial audit of a logging concession, $500 for a sawmill and an ongoing In addition to forensic techniques, genetic charge of $25 for each m3 of product (Wilson, fingerprinting of individual trees to track them 2012), although genetic testing, wood throughout the trade chain has been developed. microscopy and isotopic testing are optional Recent work in Indonesia has worked to sample add-ons to the scheme (Lin Goh, 2015).

6.3.6 Stable isotopes There has been some work to apply stable Analysis of prepared samples is not a lengthy isotopes to determine geographical origin of process but labs generally offer turnaround timber in trade, such as in Southeast Asian trees times of 2-4 weeks (up to 12 weeks at some: UC (Kagawa and Leavitt, 2010). Some work to Davis Stable Isotope Facility, 2015). The prices investigate the use of strontium isotopes to vary by country and lab (US$10 per sample for determine geographic origin has shown some analysis of 15N: UC Davis Stable Isotope Facility, success but analysis of this isotope is extremely 2015). This is for prepared samples: samples expensive (Roberts, 2015).The CertiSource must be fully dried, ground to a fine powder, timber certification system uses isotopic analysis weighed and encapsulated in special tin as one of the tools to verify the origin of traded capsules. This is not a sterile process so does not timber in Indonesia (Lin Goh, 2015). require a lab but does require some specialist equipment.

6.4 Orchids Ecuador is a key hotspot for orchids with 4051 recorded species, more than any other country in the world (Hassler and Rheinheimer, 2015). This diversity of species, the majority of which are not widely traded is likely to be a benefit to Ecuador’s orchid export industry due to global hobbyist demand for species that are rare in trade (Hinsley et al., 2015). However, the trade in orchid species rather than hybrids increases the risk of laundering of wild individuals using CITES paperwork for cultivated plants (OECD, 2000; Ogden et al., 2009). A number of methods for orchids for identifying the provenance of orchids in trade are described below.

6.4.1 Registration In China, orchid exports are monitored through service for approval, after which national CITES a system of legal registration of all mother-stock scientific authority must approve the export by nurseries. When CITES permits are applied before the permits are issued. The process is for live plants, these registration documents increasingly becoming digitised to reduce must be supplied to the local CITES office, which translation problems between English names forwards the plant list to the provincial wildlife and Chinese characters (Perner, 2015).

6.4.2 Morphological characteristics Currently, the primary method for characteristics (CITES, 2008a). Wild plants are distinguishing wild from cultivated orchids in identified by insect damage or the presence of international trade is the use of morphological microflora on leaves, and roots that have been broken or have not grown to the shape of the pot (CITES, 2008a). In 1997, Thai customs officers worked with the Royal Botanic Garden (RBG) Kew, UK to produce an identification guide to help differentiate between wild and cultivated orchids. Brazil has translated this guide to Portuguese for use by their customs officials (Mello, 2015). There is also a series of identification guides aimed at enforcers of CITES,

including a guide focused on slipper orchids characteristics. Conversely, businesses trading produced by RBG Kew (McGough et al., 2006) in wild-collected plants are often highly and specific guidance for differentiating organized and aware of the requirements to pass between wild and cultivated plants produced by customs checks. Some may have strategies to the CITES Secretariat (CITES, 2008a) (The make their plants look cultivated, such as Ministry of Environment of Peru, for example, growing wild-collected specimens in nursery has also published an identification guide for the conditions until roots grow to the shape of the most traded orchid species (MINAM, 2015). pot, a key characteristic checked during Customs inspections (Hinsley, 2015). For these This approach is not always accurate as small reasons, improving traceability can have the businesses in tropical countries may grow dual benefits of controlling illegal trade in wild- epiphytic orchids outdoors or in open shade collected plants and strengthening legal trade. houses, producing plants with wild

6.4.3 Code-based identification methods: Barcoding, QR codes, laser marking The use of physical marking with a unique 10/2015). Plastic strip labels are printed by the identifying code is widely used in the orchid nursery with unique and non-reusable floriculture industry (Hu, 2009). One of the numerical codes provided by GS1; the labels most robust systems are the barcodes developed include the nursery logo, a species code and by GS1 (Bechini et al., 2008), an international other information (Carol Villena, Agro Oriente supply chain management organization (GS1, [in personal communication], 10/2015). 2015a). In addition to traditional barcodes, QR Although barcodes can be used in the labels, codes that can be scanned using ordinary smart they are not currently used due to licencing phone devices have been adopted widely, costs for GS1 barcodes (approximately USD 6 including in the Taiwanese orchid industry (Hu, 000 for the first year and USD 1 500 a year, in 2009). successive years). Additionally, due to the Different types of code-based marking are used practical difficulties of permanently attaching widely to track products in major labels to orchids (given their sympodial growth), commercial orchid production systems labels can be separated from plants. However, (e.g. Taiwan: Hu, 2009). These the labelling system has been of considerable companies produce mass-market use to Agro Oriente when it comes to better hybrid orchids. Agro Oriente Viveros internal organisation of plants (Carol Villena, S.A.C. in Peru, a nursery selling over Agro Oriente [in personal communication], 1,000 mainly Peruvian species, 10/2015). On the other hand, the system is not participated in a project to use GS1 being used as a full tracability system by the Global Trade Item Numbers (GTIN) to CITES Management Authority of Peru given the track the origin and identity of all lack of participation in the pilot project (Carol plants leaving the nursery Villena, Agro Oriente [in personal (InfoRegion, 2012). The pilot project communication], 10/2015). Inspections focus was supported by the CITES Scientific primarily on ensuring that production levels are Authority of Peru) the Ministry of the consistent with the number of individuals of Environment) and implemented by new species legally acquired and the presence of GS1 Peru, with the characteristics associated with propogation and aim of improving the growth of plants (Carol Villena, Agro Oriente [in traceability of orchids personal communication], 10/2015). in the country. It This demonstrates the potential for the use of included the introduction of a identification codes for orchid traceability but, system to organise plants in the as laundering of wild orchids is known to occur nurseries, the marking of each (Ogden et al., 2009), one potential problem of plant with plastic labels and the physical tags or labels could be the ease by which maintenance of an inventory they could be removed and attached to a wild- (Carol Villena, Agro Oriente [in collected plant. There may be potential to personal communication], overcome this by marking leaves or roots

directly, possibly using methods such as laser plants, although more work is needed to fine- marking, which has been shown to be effective tune the method and test it for other taxonomic and cause minimal damage to rhododendron groups (Marx et al., 2013).

6.4.4 Radio-frequency identification (RFID) In horticulture, RFID tags are attached directly export of hybrid orchids for the global mass- to the outside of pots or plants, inserted in to market (Sutharoj, 2008). potting medium (Barge et al., 2009) or For orchids, inserting RFID tags directly in to implanted in to plant tissue (Luvisi et al., 2010a). plant tissue may overcome the potential RFID tracking has been used widely for plant problem of laundering but this has been shown traceability including for timber (Seidel et al., to cause infection and damage in other plants 2012), agricultural plants (e.g. grapevines Luvisi, (Luvisi et al., 2010b). Work to identify the Triolo, et al., 2010) and ornamental plants such potential for damage to orchids of different as roses (Luvisi et al., 2010a) and Camellias species would be required to prevent infection (Barge et al., 2009). Thailand, one of the world’s or damage to plants. Currently a simple RFID tag leading orchid producers, uses RFID for quality costs between 7 and 15 US cents and readers can control purposes during the production and cost up to US$500 (RFID Journal LLC, 2015).

6.4.5 DNA barcoding For orchids, establishing a reference sample CITES Appendix I Phragmipedium spp. And database and identifying genetic markers to morphologically similar Appendix II orchids discriminate between small numbers of genera (Morrison et al., 2005; Salas et al., 2007; Lahaye and species is possible and has been et al., 2008). To identify wild versus cultivated demonstrated in Mexico (Sosa et al., 2013), Korea origin would require further work to collect (Kim et al., 2014) and for mixed products in reference samples for different wild and Traditional Asian Medicine (Asahina et al., cultivated populations of each target species 2010). This includes discrimination between (Honjo et al., 2007).

6.4.6 Stable isotope analysis/metabolomics In addition to DNA, analysis of the compounds the environmental conditions during growth of and elements within samples of plant material is the tissue (Bundy et al., 2008). one technique of growing interest for Work to apply both of these techniques to traceability studies (Retief et al., 2014; Dormontt traded orchids is currently being undertaken by et al., 2015). For example, stable isotope analysis the University of Kent, UK. Preliminary results has been applied to identify geographic origin of suggest that stable isotopes and metabolic timber (Dormontt et al., 2015) and has been compounds in wild and cultivate plants of the shown to successfully discriminate between same genus do show some differences but that indoor and outdoor cultivated cannabis (West et this is highly variable between genera. This may al., 2009) and identify cycads in cultivation that mean that reference samples for cultivated and have been collected from the wild (Retief et al., wild plants in different genera would be needed 2014). Stable isotopes of Carbon (Kagawa and to establish a baseline for the use of this Leavitt, 2010; Hansen et al., 2014; West et al., technique. Individual sample analysis for stable 2009) and Nitrogen (West et al., 2009) are most isotopes of carbon and nitrogen are relatively commonly used and the least costly to analyse. inexpensive but both techniques require access Other potential methods include metabolomics, to specialist laboratory equipment. a technique that identifies key metabolites within a sample that can then be used to infer

6.5 Ivory China and Japan have established internal countries are insufficient and are susceptible to traceability mechanisms for legally sourced laundering of illegal ivory. ivory. In China this consists of a system of Various methods have been developed to registered processor and retailers allowed to ascertain the origin of seized illegal ivory, which work and sell ivory from legal stocks. All pieces can then be recorded in the ETIS database are issued with a unique product number and a (TRAFFIC International, 2012) or C4ADS certificate; for all pieces with a value greater database (a non-profit organisation with a than CNY 500 this is also accompanied by a database of over 500 ivory seizures since 2008; photograph of the piece. Items have to be sold c4ads, 2015). Analysis of these databases can with this certificate. New items produced have yield traceability to the level of patters of origin to be reported to the Wildlife Detecting Centre, of ivory (Vira et al., 2014). X-ray fluorescence which records the details and issues a new (Kautenburger et al., 2004; Singh et al., 2006) certificate. The use of the raw ivory stocks are has largely given way to stable isotope analysis also monitored through the database system to ascertain geographic origin (Cerling et al., (CITES, 2005; Lau, 2014). In Japan domestic 2007; Ziegler et al., 2012), which is aided by the manufacturers and wholesalers have to keep creation of a database for ivory reference, where records of ivory they buy and sell, including isotope samples of known geographic origin are registration numbers. Whole tusks have to be submitted to create an “isotope map” (WWF- registered with the Environmental Agency and Germany, 2014). DNA analysis is also each tusk is issued a registration card. Pieces of increasingly used identify geographic origin cut tusks can be given management cards to (Wasser et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2013). Recently certify legal status, and finished products can be GPS trackers have been attached to fake tusks to certified through the use of a government issued track their movement (National Geographic, seal; however, neither is compulsory (Kiyono, 2015), which could be implemented in any future 2002). legal ivory sales. A number of organizations have posited that the control measures in place for legal trade in these

Box 1. Selected CITES Recommendations and Resolutions on Ivory relevant to traceability

CITES Conf. 10.10- Trade in Elephant Specimens (CITES, 2013e) In recognition of the impact of illegal trade in ivory on elephant populations, the parties passed a resolution in 1997 on the trade in elephant specimens (CITES, 2013e), laying out recommendations for the labelling of tusks, and larger ivory samples with permanent marks using the formula “country-of-origin two-letter ISO code, the last two digits of the year / the serial number for the year / and the weight in kilograms (e.g. KE00/127/14)”. It also recommended registering “all importers, exporters, manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers dealing in raw or worked ivory”. A database for collecting data on seizures of illegal ivory was also established (ETIS- Elephant Trade Information System), to collect information including the countries of origin, seizure, export and destination.

Guidance on Interpretation and Implementation of the Convention. SC65 Doc. 42.1 Annex 1 (CITES, 2014) It was suggested that as tusk serial numbers can provide insight into quota compliance (and also be an aid to traceability) “electronic permitting and automated data transfer of trade data to the CITES Trade Database in near real-time…should be considered as a means for enhancing transparency and traceability for all species with quotas and tagging/marking systems.”

6.6 Rhino horn Traceability systems for rhino horns focus on DNA database hold profiles unique to each ascertaining the origin of intercepted illegal individual rhino, with comprehensive coverage shipments of horn and horns forming part of a of rhinos and intercepted horns in South Africa, legally hunted trophy. In 1994 CITES adopted a and some profiles from other countries resolution outlining that all Parties should mark including Zimbabwe, Botswana and Namibia any stocks of rhino horn in their possession to (Harper, 2011). Live rhinos have to be similarly allow traceability (CITES, 2010a). The 2004 microchipped in their horns; in addition, horns decision by CITES to allow export of 5 black held by private owners must be marked “with rhinos as trophies from each of South Africa and indelible ink or by means of punch die, using the Namibia stated that all exported horns or parts formula: ZA/serial number/year/weight” (South had to be exported “individually marked with African Department of Environmental Affairs, reference to the country of origin, species, quota 2012). number and year of export” (CITES, 2007). It has also been suggested that traceable Similarly, white rhino hunting trophies from transponders could be implanted into rhino South Africa have to have a microchip implanted horns to allow tracking of horns in trade and as in the horn and a DNA sample taken for entry a method of controlling a potential legal trade into the RhoDIS database (RhODIS, 2015). This (Martin, 2012).

6.7 Vicuna Products from live-sheared vicuña (Vicugna “VICUÑA-COUNTRY NAME” on the selvedge vicugna) in populations from Bolivia, Ecuador and on the reverse of the cloth the logotype of and Peru and from parts of Argentina and Chile the country. Products made from live-sheared are allowed to be traded as Appendix II with the wool have to bear the logotype and the words conditional use of specific markings: i.e. “VICUÑA-COUNTRY-ARTESANIA”.

6.8 Crocodilians Since 1994, CITES has implemented a universal importers and exporters of crocodilian tagging system for the identification of skins; and crocodilian skins. CITES Resolution Conf. 11.12  CITES hold a register of manufacturers who (Rev. CoP15; CITES, 2010b) recommends, inter produce tags conforming to requirements alia, that: (which include tamper resistant  non-reusable tags are attached to all mechanisms). Tags used are recorded in crocodilian skins entering international the CITES Management Authority trade; Database.  tags are required to contain at least the ISO However, a 2009 CITES survey found that not all two-letter code for the country of origin/re- respondents followed the guidelines with export, a CITES determined standard regards to tagging, especially the use of species code and year of transparent sealed containers, and raised production/harvest (if appropriate), as well concerns about tags being susceptible to fraud, as a unique serial identification number; although there were also no reported instances of fraud or illegal activity around the tagging  tails, throats, feet and other parts have to be system (CITES, 2009). transported in transparent, sealed containers marked with a non-reusable tag To strengthen the traceability of crocodilian or label; skins, Colombia additionally requires that skins are marked with a ‘scar button’, due to  Parties establish a system of registration or amputation of the 10th caudal scale (CITES licensing, or both, for producers, tanners, Notification No. 2014/033).

6.9 Snakes CITES Decision 16.103, adopted at CITES CoP16 The Animals Committee, at its 28th meeting (Tel in 2013, directed the CITES Animals Committee Aviv, 2015) invited the Standing Committee to to examine information relating to a potential draft a Resolution on the conservation, traceability system to confirm the legal origin of sustainable use and trade in snakes. The draft snake skins, and to advise the Standing resolution prepared by the Animals Committee Committee on the feasibility of implementing encourages Parties to develop traceability such a traceability system. systems for snake skins (AC28 Com.6). In response to the call for information on IUCN provided an overview of methods for options to establish traceability systems for differentiating between wild and captive-bred snake skins, UNCTAD and the CITES Secretariat snakes (Lyons and Natusch, 2015). commissioned a study on traceability systems Currently Indonesia manages a registry of for international trade in South East Asian collectors, traders and exporters, and attaches python skins. This study concluded that there an identification sticker to each skin exported was an urgent need to mark all python skins (Ashley, 2014). traded, there should be an inventory and tagging of all python skin stockpiles in South East Asia, Utilisation of Yellow Anacondas (Eunectes and there was a need for dedicated funding notaeus) in Argentina is managed through the sources to support traceability efforts. Regarding Yellow Anaconda Management Program traceability systems, the study suggested a two- (YAMP). As part of this programme, hunters sell tier option, with a first mandatory tier from their skins to local skin buyers who are dried skins to tanneries, using barcoded button periodically visited by a representative of the style tags, and a second, possibly voluntary tier, exporters together with a provincial wildlife from tanneries to retail using RFID tags (Ashley, officer in order to purchase skins. At that stage, 2014). skins that comply with the Program standards, including minimum sizes, are individually In addition, RESP undertook an assessment of tagged in situ. the requirements of a traceability system for reptiles, recommending that any systems The tagged hides are transported to a central implemented consist of: an identification device warehouse where they are sexed, measured, and (e.g. tag), an application device (i.e. way to field tags replaced by export tags that comply securely attach the identification device to the with the provisions established by the CITES skin), a tracking system (i.e. tracing of Management Authority of Argentina. The export identification device throughout the trade tag is required before transporting skins out of chain) and a global database to store the province and is a prerequisite for the issuing information on the supply chain and movement of a CITES export permit (Waller et al., 2011; of tagged products (RESP, 2014). Subsequently, a UNCTAD, 2014). Production of finished study by RESP in collaboration with Mexico and products is not allowed in Argentina to Italy suggested image recognition as a way to minimise entry points for laundered skins identify individual reptile skins through the (UNCTAD, 2014). In addition, YAMP annually value chain (RESP, 2015). A further review of changes the skinning pattern (i.e. the way in traceability systems and implementation with which snakes are skinned) permitted for skins, regards to snakes was being undertaken at the allowing recognition of hides from snakes time of writing by GS1, in collaboration with skinned that year and helping to avoid Switzerland (GS1, 2015b). laundering of illegally hunted specimens (Natusch et al., 2015).

6.10 Fisheries 6.10.1 EU Legislation A variety of traceability schemes for fisheries regulation fishery products imported into the have been created which aim to track products EU have to be accompanied by a catch throughout the supply chain; in the EU it has certificate; EU catches exported to a third been a legal requirement to be able to carry out country are also subject to the same scheme such traceability for all food products since 2005 (including if they are then reimported to the EU, and the enforcement of Regulation (EC) No e.g. after processing: European Commission 178/2002 (adopted in 2002; European Parliament Directorate-General For Maritime Affairs And and Council, 2002), which requires operators to Fisheries, 2009). Catch certificates are required ensure traceability of products at all stages of to be numbered uniquely, with the European production, processing and distribution. Commission recommending adoption of a numbering system that contains an ISO code for A subsequent resolution on Illegal, Unregulated, each flag state, an identifying code for the Unreported (IUU) Fishing (European Council competent national authority, year of validation Regulation (EC) No. 1005/2008 of 29 September and numbering in a continuous series (European 2008) sets out a catch certification scheme for Commission Directorate-General For Maritime fish landings aiming at preventing, deterring Affairs And Fisheries, 2009). Catch certificates and eliminating IUU fishing. As part of this

Box 2. EU food traceability legislation: Iceland Case Study (Van, 2004; Icelandic Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture, 2015)

Under the European Economic Area (EEA) Agreement, EU regulation 178/2002 is also enacted in the non EU countries of Lichtenstein, Norway and Iceland. Iceland implements fisheries traceability as follows:

From sea to boat: After pre-processing fish are put into tubs which are identified by tub number, with a label indicating the fishing day and a barcode or RFID. These can be used to connect tub contents to information such as the haul number, catch size, etc. The tub ID number is also linked to the haul number, which is in turn linked to haul information such as the fishing ground, sea temperature, haul start, duration, etc. The tub ID also links to the ship (i.e. batches can be traced back to the ship once they have left the boat).

From boat to product: Products are marked with a factory code and a lot/pallet number (which includes the production year, production date and code of products). Numbers can be linked back to which materials and ingredients were used, and from their ID numbers the suppliers can be identified. The EAN.UCC system (a standard identification system) allows products to be identified. Factories are assigned a unique barcode and a 6 digit-number, comprising a 3-digit country code and 3-digits for the logistic unit, good and services. The EAN.UCC barcode and number provide information on products such as best before dates, batch numbers etc.

From product to customer: Products remain in their original packages throughout the transportation or export process. The warehouse records the dates that products enter and their ID information, and link this record to storage information while in the warehouse as well as information on their final destination or buyers.

also list a description of the product including Chinese seafood products imported to Italy species, catch area, estimated weight and showed that 83% did not meet the EU product code (the countries customs code for requirements for traceability, with 31.1% not the product). However, recent analysis of listing the catch area (D’Amico et al., 2014).

6.10.2 Code based identification A number of systems have been developed to supply chain can also upload information on allow consumers to directly interact with fishers handling and shipping. Similarly, the CoPeGo and producers. For example, under the ThisFish Fishermen’s consortium (COPEGO, 2014) initiative (ThisFish, 2013) fish catches are tagged provides traceability of shellfish from individual with a QR code label which consumers can then breeders or fisheries areas. When entered on the scan. Upon scanning the label, catch website, codes printed on product the labels information is displayed, including where, when allow consumers to find out the origin of the and how the fish was caught, as well as general product. The traceability scheme is certified by information on the species and any stock an external certification body. certification. Companies further down the

6.10.3 DNA Barcoding There are currently no implemented products. The project includes assessment of standardised methodologies for species current fish traceability and labelling schemes, identification of seafood products (Mendes et standardisation of fish authenticity and genetic al., 2015). The EU LABELFISH project (Labelfish, traceability methodologies, and the 2015) aims to combat this by setting up establishment of an Atlantic network for species standardised techniques and analysis to control authenticity and labelling (including labs, genetic traceability and labelling of seafood companies with expertise).

6.11 Caviar The main traceability mechanism for sturgeon In the New York City area, DNA testing showed and sturgeon products (including caviar) is a 9% point decrease in mislabelled caviar post provided via CITES permits and a universal CITES listing (Doukakis et al., 2012). labelling system for caviar (CITES, 2013b). This However, laundering of illegal and wild-sourced system consists of non-reusable labels added by caviar as legal or aquacultured remains a caviar processing and repackaging plants to concern (Wuertz et al., 2009; Jahrl, 2013; primary containers (i.e. any container which Zabyelina, 2014), and no reliable test is currently caviar comes into direct contact with). The available to comprehensively assess differences information from this label has to be on the between wild and aquaculture specimens CITES export permit. Labels contain a CITES (Ludwig, 2015). CITES is currently undertaking assigned species code, a source code, country of to organise a study to assess different methods origin code, year of harvest/re-packaging, of identifying species and populations of registration code of processing/repackaging sturgeon and paddlefish, but this is awaiting plant, and a lot ID number (or CITES export/re- funding (CITES, 2015b). export permit number for re-packaging labels).

6.12 Ornamental Marine Species Ornamental aquarium species currently have morphological identification (Collins et al., little traceability due to complex supply chains 2012), and microbiological fingerprint analysis and difficulty in easily identifying specimens to (i.e. profile of bacterial communities associated species level (Cohen et al., 2013). “Mixing” of with aquatic organisms), which allows for specimens from sustainable and un-sustainable identification of geographical origin and collecting practices in traders stocking tanks discrimination between captive also hampers traceability (Cohen et al., 2013). reared/bred/wild caught (Cohen et al., 2013), Potential solutions include DNA barcoding, although this requires the establishment of a with DNA barcodes of ornamental cyprinids database of microbiological profiles for found to be 90-99% congruent with reference.

6.13 Queen Conch The Queen Conch Expert Workshop recommended in the Queen Conch Working recommended introducing traceability Group 2nd meeting as part of the fisheries mechanisms for the species (Strombus gigas) in management and conservation plan (Queen 1992 (Queen Conch Expert Workshop, 2012), Conch Working Group, 2014). However, there is while at CITES CoP16 it was stated that range currently no evidence that any progress has been states should “collaborate in exploring ways to made towards developing overarching, unified enhance the traceability of specimens in mechanisms. Colombia has a system to monitor international trade, including, but not limited landings, where landings are recorded in a to, catch certificates, labelling systems and the database, and since 2008 fisheries related data is application of genetic techniques” (CITES, supposed to have been recorded as well (Prada 2013d). Traceability mechanisms were further et al., 2008)

7. Recommendations 7.1 Traceability standards Applying appropriate taxon-specific traceability international wildlife trade traceability methods is key, but it is also important that standards are currently being considered under these methods form part of an overarching CITES and efforts should be made to provide traceability standard. Further, incorporating input into ongoing CITES discussions, to ensure Ecuador’s traceability into a global standard, that developments at the national level can such as those managed by GS1, would allow inform global discussions and that they are traceability information to be recorded in an aligned with any decisions taken. internationally applicable format. Different

7.2 Information management Information management is an essential development of this system should be linked to, component of traceability, and adequate or undertaken in conjunction with, any national information management systems should be CITES e-permitting system. implemented. In order to minimize duplication of effort, At the national level, a centralized trade relevant systems developed by other countries in information database should be implemented to the OTCA region and beyond, such as the ensure that trade and traceability information is electronic system for fisheries monitoring and accessible to MAE, AGROCALIDAD, SRP, control being scoped out by Brazil, should be Customs, wildlife management centres and considered and lessons should be drawn where other actors involved in the trade chain, relevant. including CITES Management Authorities in At the international level, the CITES authorities importing countries. To this end, MAE should of Ecuador should engage in ongoing CITES consider adapting and expanding the SUIA discussions on traceability systems, to ensure system to allow the integration and that any national efforts can contribute to management of traceability-relevant inform global efforts on the sharing of information and other wildlife trade related information related to traceability and also to information, such as the information currently ensure that global decisions and developments managed in SIB (for wildlife groups such as reflect national needs. Such developments may amphibians or orchids) or SAF (for timber). SRP include the inclusion of coded traceability should lead the development of a module to information in CITES permits, or the use of manage shark traceability and this module existing databases such as the CITES Trade should ideally be integrated into a nation-wide Database for the collation and management of information management system for wildlife data relevant to global traceability. trade management and traceability. The

7.3 Customs Codes MAE, in collaboration with Ecuador´s Customs, proposed revisions, if adopted, would not come should engage with the WCO, including in into force until 2022, MAE should work with liaison with the CITES Secretariat, regarding the Customs to introduce specific sub-codes at the need for specific Customs sub-codes to cover national level, in order to improve the recording CITES-listed species to be considered in the next of information at the points of export and import revision of the Harmonised System. As any and to trigger compliance checks at borders.

7.4 Improve detection Strict inspections at each stage of the trade chain schemes, the current practice in Ecuador of need to complement any traceability system, to regular inspections of breeding facilities, ensure that shipments are not tampered with to transport warehouses (where these are used) include illegal products or specimens. In line and border crossings should be strengthened to with the methodologies of many certification ensure that traceability information is being

checked and recorded correctly and consistently should then be matched with export permits. throughout the trade chain. In line with current One weak point that smugglers often exploit is practice, all breeding facilities should register the postal system and this should be a priority lists of species and the origin and number of for extra inspections. wild-collected parent-stock. This information

7.5 Build capacity Capacity building workshops with ongoing place. Further workshops on species follow-up training should be implemented for identification and in-depth training on all actors dealing with part of the supply chain, traceability methods applied nationally should including AGROCALIDAD, Postal workers, be provided to all of those involved in trade customs officers and police. The focus of these chain management, with a particular focus on workshops should be general information about customs officers and postal workers. These wildlife trade, the importance of managing it workshops should be repeated regularly to train carefully and the requirements for export of new staff members and update those staff some of the major taxonomic groups, including already trained on new species in trade or the importance of traceability and methods in developments in traceability methods.

7.6 Chain of Custody Two systems for establishing a chain of custody considered when deciding on implementing any are suggested below: a “model” system, which of these recommendations. would provide greatly enhanced traceability and The suggested changes will also potentially security of the chain of custody, albeit at require establishment in a legal framework to potentially great cost of effort and finances; and outline the procedures expected of producers an “alternative” system, which would not and how the costs for any new system will be provide as secure a chain of custody, but which borne. would be lower cost. This balance should be

7.6.1 Model System After catch verification (for sharks) and during have a unique identifier associated with the MAE visits to breeding/propagation centres (for export permit. Tags could contain a barcode or amphibians and orchids), products and RFID tag to increase the efficiency of certificate specimens should be tagged by a wildlife creation as they could be scanned, although department officer, following appropriate RFID tags will come with a greater associated methods for each taxonomic group, as suggested cost. Scanning can also be automated with the in recommendation 7.6.1.1-4; this will reduce the use of automatic proximity detectors. potential for laundering as specimens can be This double verification of contents would allow checked against catch certificates/breeding customs to easily identify if containers or their centre records and tags should only be available contents had been tampered with. Any through restricted channels. containers opened by customs should therefore Upon packaging of products for export or intra- be re-sealed with a customs specific tag. For country movement, tags should be checked extra security, shipments could be accompanied (either systematically or random spot checks) by with a photograph of all products enclosed. MAE staff and tag numbers recorded on the Inspection of exports by customs would also be mobilisation guides. streamlined by the use of CITES specific custom codes with restrictions, to highlight to customs The package should then be sealed in an export shipments which require accompanying container with a tamper-evident seal by a paperwork, e.g. CITES permits. wildlife department officer; this seal should also

7.6.1.1 Amphibians Currently there are no rigorous methods being the potential to become a world leader in their used to ensure traceability of amphibians in implementation. international trade, meaning that Ecuador has

Individual traceability of specimens, if required tagging, with unique alphanumeric codes for whole chain traceability (i.e. even after corresponding to the wildlife management removal of animals from shipment boxes) could centre. be best achieved using visible implant alpha

7.6.1.2 Orchids If transported in large numbers, then individual explored. These techniques could be used to tagging of plants would be difficult for both randomly check plants in nurseries or those growers and those inspecting shipments. leaving the country in shipments, to increase the likelihood of detecting illegal plants in the trade. In addition, the feasibility of producing Many orchids are sent in shipments through the reference databases for forensic techniques such post, so these checks should also be performed as genetic or stable isotope analysis should be on orchids sent in this way. 7.6.1.3 Sharks Shark fins should be tagged before finning products in Argentina); this would reduce the occurs using tamper proof tags such as those onus of detailed inspections by customs officers currently used for crocodile skins. Inspection of to a shorter period each year, and any products exports by customs could be made easier by outside of that period could be automatically imposing a specific period for exports of shark seized as illegal. However, exporters may object products (as already done for Yellow Anaconda to this potential disruption to revenue streams. 7.6.1.4 Timber The use of RFID tags in Peru and Malaysia has and producer to be combined with information been successful and has great potential for about each step in the trade chain, from sawmill applicability to the Ecuadorian timber trade. to end consumer. Auditing of each step would Ecuador should consider applying Peru´s model be essential to ensure that tags are being for timber traceability, including application of attached and read correctly. Georeferencing and RFID tags to trees and logs and barcodes to end measuring all trees should be considered to products to allow information about the tree provide additional relevant information.

7.6.2 Alternative System MAE visits to breeding centres (for frogs and specimens to be euthanized, and thus is not orchids) should check that species present likely to be practicable in small populations, as match those on original wild collection permits, well as potentially ethically questionable. and that numbers of offspring/propagated Producers could put labels on orchids (initially plants are realistic given the biology of the in pots and then on plants, once they reach an species concerned (although this may be appropriate size) using unique codes difficult for orchids due to the large number of (potentially, using a system similar to that tested native species and the relative lack of in Peru, see Section 6.4.3). This should be information on their biology). This will require combined with an electronic information initial training or reinforcement of knowledge of management system (see Section 7.2), which MAE officers in the biology and identification of would allow the traceability of individual plants species. in the system. Distinguishing whether specimens in As sharks already have a system in place to breeding/propagation centres are wild sourced provide a degree of traceability (albeit with will be difficult for orchids due propagated identified weaknesses; see Figure 1), specimens often being grown outside, meaning recommendations for this taxa focus on they are likely to exhibit physical signs usually improving the current system. This should restricted to wild plants. This distinction will be include checking that the species and number of easier for amphibian species that produce skin specimens landed match those on the catch toxins as the skin alkaloids are likely to be certificate, with similar checks conducted similar between individuals if captive reared (see during police stops when products are in transit. section 6.1.5). However, the test to determine This will required enhanced collaboration the similarity of skin alkaloids requires the between the different inspection agencies in the

supply chain, i.e. the fisheries department, The use of CITES specific custom codes would police, MAE and customs. This could be aided prompt customs to check orchid, shark and by the creation of an electronic information amphibian shipments; these checks should management system, potentially similar to that verify that a correct CITES permit accompanies being proposed by Brazil for its shark product the shipment and that the species and number supply chain (see section 7.2). of individuals matches those listed on the mobilisation guide.

References AGROCALIDAD 2012a. Buenas prácticas Antwis, R.E., Purcell, R., Walker, S.L., Fidgett, agrícolas para cacao. Ecuador. A.L. and Preziosi, R.F. 2014b. Effects of visible implanted elastomer marking on AGROCALIDAD 2012b. Buenas prácticas physiological traits of frogs. Conservation pecuarias de producción de leche. Ecuador. Physiology, 2: 1–9.

AGROCALIDAD 2014. Cadena agroproductiva Appel, A.W. 2011. Security Seals on Voting del cacao. Ecuador. Machines. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security, 14(2): AGROCALIDAD 2015. SISTEMA SIFAE. Article No. 18. Available at: http://sistemas.agrocalidad.gob.ec/sifae/. Arntzen, J., Goudie, I., Halley, J. and Jehle, R. [Accessed: 12/10/2015]. 2004. Cost comparison of marking techniques in long-term population Alphalyse 2015. Alphalyse Protein Analysis studies: PIT-tags versus pattern maps. Pricing. Available at: Amphibi, (1830): 305–315. http://www.alphalyse.com/pricing_2014_ pp.html. [Accessed: 14/09/2015]. Asahina, H., Shinozaki, J., Masuda, K., Morimitsu, Y. and Satake, M. 2010. Anastasiadou, D., Koulinas, K., Kiourtsis, F. and Identification of medicinal Dendrobium Athanasiadis, I.N. 2014. Complementary species by phylogenetic analyses using software solutions for efficient timber matK and rbcL sequences. Journal of logging and trade management. In: natural medicines, 64(2): 133–8. Proceedings of the 28th EnviroInfo 2014 Conference. Oldenburg, Germany. Ashley, D. 2014. Traceability systems for a sustainable international trade in South Andrews, A. and Foy, R. 2009. Geographical East Asian python skins. New York and variation in the carbon and nitrogen Geneva. stable isotope ratios in spiny dogfish in the Northeastern Pacific Ocean. In: Asif, M.J. and Cannon, C.H. 2005. DNA Biology and management of dogfish extraction from processed wood: A case sharks. American Fisheries Society, study for the identification of an Maryland, USA. 269–276. endangered timber species (Gonystylus bancanus). Plant Molecular Biology Andriamaharavo, N.R., Garraffo, H.M., Spande, Reporter, 23(2): 185–192. T.F., Giddings, L.-A., Vieites, D.R., Vences, M. and Saporito, R. a. 2015. Individual and Bainbridge, L., Stockwell, M., Valdez, J., Klop- Geographic Variation of Skin Alkaloids in Toker, K., Clulow, S., Clulow, J. and Three Swamp-Forest Species of Mahony, M. 2015. Tagging tadpoles: Madagascan Poison Frogs (Mantella). retention rates and impacts of visible Journal of Chemical Ecology, 41(9): 837– implant elastomer (VIE) tags from the 847. larval to adult amphibian stages. HERPETOLOGICAL JOURNAL, 25(3): 133– Antwis, R.E., Garcia, G., Fidgett, A.L. and 140. Preziosi, R.F. 2014a. Tagging frogs with passive integrated transponders causes Barbuto, M., Galimberti, a., Ferri, E., Labra, M., disruption of the cutaneous bacterial Malandra, R., Galli, P. and Casiraghi, M. community and proliferation of 2010. DNA barcoding reveals fraudulent opportunistic fungi. Applied and substitutions in shark seafood products: environmental microbiology, 80(15): 4779– The Italian case of ‘palombo’ (Mustelus 84. spp.). Food Research International, 43(1): 376–381.

Barge, P., Gay, P., Merlino, V. and Tortia, C. illegally logged timber and wood 2009. Traceability for each pot. Colture products. Royal Institute of International Protette, 38(11): 56–58. Affairs, (February): 73.

Beasley, J., Webster, S.C., Rhodes, O.E. and Bradfield, K.S. 2004. Photographic Cunningham, F.L. 2015. Evaluation of identification of individual Archey’s frogs, Rhodamine B as a biomarker for assessing Leiopelma archeyi, from natural markings. bait acceptance in wild pigs. Wildlife DOC Science Internal Series, (191): 5–36. Society Bulletin, 39(1): 188–192. Bundy, J.G., Davey, M.P. and Viant, M.R. 2008. Bechini, A., Cimino, M.G.C.A., Marcelloni, F. Environmental metabolomics: a critical and Tomasi, A. 2008. Patterns and review and future perspectives. technologies for enabling supply chain Metabolomics, 5(1): 3–21. traceability through collaborative e- business. Information and Software Burdick, S.M. 2011. Tag Loss and Short-Term Technology, 50(4): 342–359. Mortality Associated with Passive Integrated Transponder Tagging of Beukers, J.S., Jones, G.P. and Buckley, R.M. Juvenile Lost River Suckers. North 1995. Use of implant microtags for studies American Journal of Fisheries on populations of small reef fish. Marine Management, 31(6): 1088–1092. Ecology Progress Series, 125(1-3): 61–66. Burghardt, T. 2008. Visual Animal Biometrics: Biomark 2015. Biomark Frequently Asked Automatic Detection and Individual Questions. Available at: Identification by Coat Pattern. University http://www.biomark.com/contact_us/faqs of Bristol. 1-191 pp. /. [Accessed: 11/09/2015]. c4ads 2015. c4ads | Data-Driven Conflict & Blundell, A.G. and Mascia, M.B. 2005. Security Analysis. Available at: Discrepancies in reported levels of http://www.c4ads.org/. [Accessed: international wildlife trade. Conservation 12/10/2015]. Biology, 19(6): 2020–2025. Camin, F., Perini, M., Bontempo, L., Fabroni, S., Bobo, K., Nanfack, R.F., Moulende, T., Saha, Faedi, W., Magnani, S., Baruzzi, G., N.N. and Bokkestijn, A. 2011. Tracking Bonoli, M., Tabilio, M.R., Musmeci, S. et Cameroon’s FLEGT timber. ITTO Tropical al. 2011. Potential isotopic and chemical Forest Update, 22(2): 5–8. markers for characterising organic fruits. Food Chemistry, 125(3): 1072–1082. Bogari, E., Zavarsky, P., Lindskog, D. and Ruhl, R. 2012. An analysis of security weaknesses Carvalho, D.C., Neto, D. a. P., Brasil, B.S. a. F. in the evolution of RFID enabled passport. and Oliveira, D. a. a. 2011. DNA barcoding World Congress on Internet Security, 158– unveils a high rate of mislabeling in a 166. commercial freshwater catfish from Brazil. Mitochondrial DNA, 22(S1): 97–105. BOLD Systems 2014. BOLD Systems v3. Available at: http://barcodinglife.com/. Cerling, T.E., Omondi, P. and Macharia, A.N. [Accessed: 12/10/2015]. 2007. Diets of Kenyan elephants from stable isotopes and the origin of BOLD Systems 2015. BOLD Systems: Taxonomy confiscated ivory in Kenya. African Browser - Amphibia {class}. Available at: Journal of Ecology, 45(4): 614–623. http://www.barcodinglife.com/index.php/ TaxBrowser_TaxonPage?taxid=50. CertiSource 2015. CertiSource Legality Standard [Accessed: 10/09/2015]. for Indonesia. Principles, Criteria and Indicators Verified Legal Timber v4.03. Brack, D., Gray, K. and Hayman, G. 2002. Controlling the international trade in

Chapman, D.D., Pinhal, D. and Shivji, M.S. CITES. 2013a. CITES and trade in snake skins. 2009. Tracking the fin trade: Genetic Avilable at: stock identification in western Atlantic http://unctad.org/meetings/es/Presentati scalloped hammerhead sharks Sphyrna on/ditcted_171013_meulenaer_en.pdf lewini. Endangered Species Research, 9: 221–228. CITES 2013b. Conservation of and trade in sturgeons and paddlefish Conf. 12.7 (Rev. Chatham House 2007. Certisource uses DNA CoP16). CITES. test to identify legal logs. Available at: http://www.illegal- CITES 2013c. Quotas for leopard hunting logging.info/content/certisource-uses- trophies and skins for personal use. Conf. dna-test-identify-legal-logs. [Accessed: 10.14 (Rev. CoP16). 3 pp. 14/10/2015]. CITES 2013d. Regional cooperation on the Christian, C., Ainley, D., Bailey, M., Dayton, P., management of and trade in the queen Hocevar, J., LeVine, M., Nikoloyuk, J., conch (Strombus gigas). CoP16 Com. I. 15. Nouvian, C., Velarde, E., Werner, R. et al. 2 pp. 2013. A review of formal objections to Marine Stewardship Council fisheries CITES 2013e. Trade in elephant specimens. Conf. certifications. Biological Conservation, 161: 10.10 (Rev. CoP16). 1-8 pp. 10–17. CITES 2014. Elephant conservation, illegal killing CITES 2005. CITES Secretariat Technical and ivory trade (SC65 Doc. 42.1). Sixty-fifth Mission Report: Verification mission meeting of the Standing Committee. related to the control of internal trade in Geneva, Switzerland. 1-38 pp. ivory in China. SC53 Doc. 20.1 Annex. 10 pp. CITES 2015a. Resources for implementation: Traceability. Available at: CITES 2007. Establishment of export quotas for https://cites.org/eng/prog/shark/traceabil black rhinoceros hunting trophies. Conf. ity.php. [Accessed: 7/08/2015]. 13.5 (Rev. CoP14). 2 pp. CITES 2015b. Identification of sturgeons and CITES 2008a. Differentiating wild-collected and paddlefish specimens in trade (Decision artifically propagated plants. 16.137). AC28 Doc. 11. 2 pp. GreenCustoms Knowledge Series No. 8. CITES Secretariat. 56 pp. Clary, R. 2009. Malaysia adopts RFID in timber industry - SecureIDNews. CITES 2008b. Notification to the Parties No. 2008/021. Stolen corodile and leopard skin Coghlan, M.L., Haile, J., Houston, J., Murray, tags. 1 pp. D.C., White, N.E., Moolhuijzen, P., Bellgard, M.I. and Bunce, M. 2012. Deep CITES 2009. Trade in crocodilian specimens. sequencing of plant and animal DNA SC58 Doc. 27. CITES, Geneva, Switzerland. contained within traditional Chinese medicines reveals legality issues and CITES 2010a. Conservation of and trade in health safety concerns. PLoS genetics, African and Asian rhinoceroses. Conf. 9.14 8(4): e1002657. (Rev. CoP15). 3 pp. Cohen, F.P. a., Valenti, W.C. and Calado, R. CITES 2010b. Universal tagging system for the 2013. Traceability Issues in the Trade of identification of skins. Conf. 11.12 (Rev. Marine Ornamental Species. Reviews in CoP15). 4 pp. Fisheries Science, 21(2): 98–111.

Collins, R. a, Armstrong, K.F., Meier, R., Yi, Y., Dinh, H., Coman, G., Hurwood, D.A. and Brown, S.D.J., Cruickshank, R.H., Keeling, Mather, P.B. 2012. Experimental S. and Johnston, C. 2012. Barcoding and assessment of the utility of visible implant border biosecurity: identifying cyprinid elastomer tags in a stock improvement fishes in the aquarium trade. PloS one, programme for giant freshwater prawn 7(1): e28381. (Macrobrachium rosenbergii) in Vietnam. Aquaculture Research, 43(10): 1471–1479. Conquer Scientific 2015. Gas Chromatographs (GC) for sale: used lab equipment by Dormontt, E.E., Boner, M., Braun, B., Conquer Scientific. Available at: Breulmann, G., Degen, B., Espinoza, E., https://conquerscientific.com/lab- Gardner, S., Guillery, P., Hermanson, J.C., equipment/gas-chromatographs- Koch, G. et al. 2015. Forensic timber gc/#subcategories. [Accessed: 14/09/2015]. identification: It’s time to integrate disciplines to combat illegal logging. COPEGO 2014. Consorzio Pescatori di Goro. Biological Conservation, Available at: http://www.copego.it/en/. [Accessed: 13/10/2015]. Doukakis, P., Pikitch, E.K., Rothschild, A., DeSalle, R., Amato, G. and Kolokotronis, Cousin, X., Daouk, T., Péan, S., Lyphout, L., S.-O. 2012. Testing the effectiveness of an Schwartz, M.-E. and Bégout, M.-L. 2012. international conservation agreement: Electronic individual identification of marketplace forensics and CITES caviar zebrafish using radio frequency trade regulation. PloS one, 7(7): e40907. identification (RFID) microtags. The Journal of experimental biology, 215(Pt 16): Duong, B., Liu, H., Li, C., Deng, W., Ma, L. and 2729–34. Su, M. 2014a. Printed multilayer microtaggants with phase change D’Amico, P., Armani, A., Castigliego, L., Sheng, nanoparticles for enhanced labeling G., Gianfaldoni, D. and Guidi, A. 2014. security. ACS Applied Materials and Seafood traceability issues in Chinese food Interfaces, 6(11): 8909–8912. business activities in the light of the european provisions. Food Control, 35(1): Duong, B., Liu, H., Ma, L. and Su, M. 2014b. 7–13. Covert thermal barcodes based on phase change nanoparticles. Scientific Reports, Daly, J., Myers, C., Warnick, J. and 4(5170): 1–5. Albuquerque, E. 1980. Levels of batrachotoxin and lack of sensitivity to its Dykstra, D.P., Kuru, G., Taylor, R., Nussbaum, action in poison-dart frogs (Phyllobates). R., Magrath, W. and Story, J. 2002. Science, 208(4450): 1383–1385. TECHNOLOGIES FOR WOOD TRACKING : Verifying and Monitoring the Daly, J.W., Spande, T.F. and Garraffo, H.M. Chain of Custody and Legal Compliance in 2005. Alkaloids from amphibian skin: A the Timber Industry World Bank / WWF tabulation of over eight-hundred Alliance for Forest Conservation and compounds. Journal of Natural Products, Sustainable Use. 88 pp. 68(10): 1556–1575. Eden, S. 2009. The work of environmental Degen, B. and Fladung, M. 2008. Use of DNA- governance networks: Traceability, markers for tracing illegal logging. In: credibility and certification by the Forest Proceedings of the International Workshop Stewardship Council. Geoforum, 40(3): Fingerprinting Methods for. Bonn, 383–394. Germany. 6–14.

European Commission Directorate-General For Fischer, J. 2013. Fish identification tools for Maritime Affairs And Fisheries 2009. biodiversity and fishereis assessments. Handbook on the practical application of Rome, Italy. 107 pp. Council Regulation (EC) No . 1005/2008 of 29 September 2008 establishing a Flaudrops, C., Armstrong, N., Raoult, D. and Community system to prevent , deter and Chabrière, E. 2015. Determination of the eliminate illegal , unreported and animal origin of meat and gelatin by unregulated fishing ( The IUU Regulation MALDI-TOF-MS. Journal of Food ). 87 pp. Available at: Composition and Analysis, 41: 104–112. http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/external _relations/illegal_fishing/pdf/handbook_e Flodin, J., Oja, J. and Grönlund, A. 2008. n.pdf. Fingerprint traceability of sawn products using industrial measurement systems for European Parliament and Council 2002. x-ray log scanning and sawn timber Regulation (EC) No 178/2002. Laying down surface scanning. Forest Products Journal, the general principles and requirements of 58(11): 100–105. food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down FlorEcuador 2015. About FlorEcuador®. procedures in matters of food safety. L31/1- Available at: 24 pp. Available at: http://eur- http://www.florecuador.com.ec/en/index. lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do? php/florec/msomos. [Accessed: uri=OJ:L:2002:031:0001:0024:EN:PDF. 11/09/2015].

European Parliament and Council 2003. Fragoso, G. and Ferriss, S. 2008. Monitoring Commision Decision of 19 August 2003 International Wildlife Trade with Coded concerning the development of an Species Data: Response to Gerson et al. integrated computerised veterinary system 1648–1650 pp. known as Traces. L216/58-59 pp. Fry, T.L., Atwood, T. and Dunbar, M.R. 2010. Evans, A.F., Hostetter, N.J., Roby, D.D., Collis, Evaluation of rhodamine B as a biomarker K., Lyons, D.E., Sandford, B.P., for raccoons. Human-Wildlife Ledgerwood, R.D. and Sebring, S. 2012. Interactions, 4(2): 275–282. Systemwide Evaluation of Avian Predation on Juvenile Salmonids from the Columbia FSC 2015a. About FSC. Available at: River Based on Recoveries of Passive http://www.fsc-uk.org/about-fsc.2.htm. Integrated Transponder Tags. [Accessed: 15/09/2015]. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 141(4): 975–989. FSC 2015b. Online Claims Platform: What is the OCP? Available at: FairWild 2009. FairWild - Home. Available at: https://ic.fsc.org/online-claims- http://www.fairwild.org/. [Accessed: 12/10/2015]. platform.181.htm. [Accessed 14/10/2015].

FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department Funk, W.C., Donnelly, M.A. and Lips, K.R. 2005. 2015. FAO Fisheries & Aquaculture - Alternative views of amphibian toe- iSharkFin. Available at: clipping. Nature, 433(7023): 193. http://www.fao.org/fishery/ipoa- sharks/iSharkFin/en. [Accessed: Galil, B.S., Genovesi, P., Ojaveer, H., Quílez- 12/10/2015]. Badia, G. and Occhipinti, A. 2013. Mislabeled: Eco-labeling an invasive alien Fenolio, D.B., Graening, G.O., Collier, B. a and shellfish fishery. Biological Invasions, Stout, J.F. 2006. Coprophagy in a cave- 15(11): 2363–2365. adapted salamander; the importance of bat guano examined through nutritional and stable isotope analyses. Proceedings of The Royal Society B, 273(1585): 439–443.

Gamble, L., Ravela, S. and McGarigal, K. 2008. Guimarães, M., Corrêa, D.T., Filho, S.S., Multi-scale features for identifying Oliveira, T. a L., Doherty, P.F. and individuals in large biological databases: Sawaya, R.J. 2014. One step forward: An application of pattern recognition contrasting the effects of Toe clipping and technology to the marbled salamander PIT tagging on frog survival and recapture Ambystoma opacum. Journal of Applied probability. Ecology and evolution, 4(8): Ecology, 45(1): 170–180. 1480–90.

Garrett, S. 1996. Microtaggants for Positive Guisandea, C., Manjarrés-Hernández, A., Identification. Avilable at: Pelayo-Villamil, P., Granado-Lorencio, C., http://www.fs.fed.us/t- Riveiro, I., Acuña, A., Prieto-Piraquive, E., d/pubs/html/96241302/96241302.html Janeiro, E., Matías, J.M., Patti, C. et al. 2015. iPez. Available at: Garroway, C.J., Bowman, J. and Wilson, P.J. http://www.ipez.es/. [Accessed: 2012. Complex social structure of southern 12/10/2015]. flying squirrels is related to spatial proximity but not kinship. Behavioral Guo, B.L., Wei, Y.M., Pan, J.R. and Li, Y. 2010. Ecology and Sociobiology, 67(1): 113–122. Stable C and N isotope ratio analysis for regional geographical traceability of cattle Gerson, H. 2012. International trade in in China. Food Chemistry, 118(4): 915–920. amphibians: A customs perspective. Alytes, 29(1-4): 103–115. Han, S., Bae, H.J., Kim, J., Shin, S., Choi, S.-E., Lee, S.H., Kwon, S. and Park, W. 2012. Gibbons, J.W. and Andrews, K.M. 2004. PIT Lithographically encoded polymer tagging: simple technology at its best. microtaggant using high-capacity and BioScience, 54(5): 447–454. error-correctable QR code for anti- counterfeiting of drugs. Advanced Gonzalez, E.G., Krey, G., Espiñeira, M., Diez, A., materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.), 24(44): Puyet, A. and Bautista, J.M. 2010. 5924–9. Population proteomics of the European hake (Merluccius merluccius). Journal of Hansen, A.-M.S., Fromberg, A. and Frandsen, Proteome Research, 9(12): 6392–6404. H.L. 2014. Authenticity and traceability of vanilla flavors by analysis of stable GS1 (2012). GS1 global traceability standard. isotopes of carbon and hydrogen. Journal Available at: of agricultural and food chemistry, 62(42): http://www.gs1.org/docs/traceability/Glo 10326–31. bal_Traceability_Standard.pdf Harper, C. 2011. RhODIS – DNA profiling and a GS1 2015a. Global Trade Item Number (GTIN) | DNA database as a tool to protect the GS1. Available at: http://www.gs1.org/gtin. rhino. In: Dean, C. (Ed.). Proceedings of [Accessed: 20/08/2015]. the tenth meeting of the IUCN African Rhino Specialist Group held at Mokala National Park, South Africa from 5-10 GS1 2015b. Project on the traceability of python March 2011. 169–170. skins. AC28 Inf.33. 5 pp.

Hassler, M. and Rheinheimer, J. 2015. Illustrated Guillery, P. 2011. Traceability and The Forest World Compendium of Orchids - List of Stewardship Council. Available at: Taxa. Available at: http://tracefood.sintef.no/images/4/4b/8) https://worldplants.webarchiv.kit.edu/orc _Phil_Guillery,_Forest_Stewardship_Coun hids/statistics.php. [Accessed: cil_(FSC).pdf 20/08/2015].

Helbing, C.C., Maher, S.K., Han, J., Gunderson, Hou, L., Verdirame, M. and Welch, K.C. 2015. M.P. and Borchers, C. 2010. Peering into Automated tracking of wild hummingbird molecular mechanisms of action with mass and energetics over multiple time frogSCOPE. General and comparative scales using radio frequency identification endocrinology, (RFID) technology. Journal of Avian Biology, 46(1): 1–8. Helyar, S.J., Lloyd, H.A.D., De Bruyn, M., Leake, J., Bennett, N. and Carvalho, G.R. 2014. HSI 2014. National laws, multi-lateral Fish product mislabelling: Failings of agreements, regional and global traceability in the production chain and regulations on shark protection and shark implications for Illegal, Unreported and finning, as of October 2014. Washington Unregulated (IUU) fishing. PLoS ONE, D.C., USA. 9(6): 1–7. Hu, J.-I. 2009. Development of Gap and Hernández-Serna, A. and Jiménez-Segura, L.F. Traceability System for Greening the Food 2014. Automatic identification of species Chain in Taiwan. Taipei. with neural networks. PeerJ, 2: e563. Icelandic Ministry of Fisheries and Agriculture Hidalgo Manosalvas, C.E. 2013. Protocolo de 2015. Tracability: Icelandic Ministry of identificación molecular de especies de Fisheries and Agriculture. Available at: tiburón analizando muestras de Galápagos http://www.fisheries.is/products/tracabili y Puerto López. Tesis de grado, ty/. [Accessed: 15/09/2015]. Universidad San Francisco de Quito. InfoRegion 2012. Orquídeas amazónicas Hinsley, A. 2015. Amy Hinsley (UNEP-WCMC) ingresarán a mercado americano y pers. comm. 14/09/15. europeo | Inforegion. InfoRegion, 2012.

Hinsley, A., Verissimo, D. and Roberts, D.L. International Customs Tariff Bureau 2008. 2015. Heterogeneity in consumer Ecuador. The International Customs preferences for orchids in international Journal, 59(19). trade and the potential for the use of market research methods to study ISO. (2000). ISO 9000:2000. Quality demand for wildlife. Biological management systems – Fundamentals and Conservation, 190: 80–86. vocabulary. Available at: http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?c Hobbs, J., Cstillo, G., Tigan, G., Lindberg, J., snumber=29280 Ikemiyagi, N. and Ramos, G. 2012. Tagging the next generation: validation of trans- ITC 2015. Standards Map. Available at: generational chemical tagging for an http://www.standardsmap.org/. endangered fish. Environmental Biology of [Accessed: 14/09/2015]. Fishes, 95: 463–468. IUCN ASG 2015. Current Priority Actions of the Honjo, M., Ueno, S., Tsumura, Y., Handa, T., Trade & Policy Working Group. Washitani, I. and Ohsawa, R. 2007. Tracing the origins of stocks of the Ivanova, N., DeWaard, J., Hajibabaei, M. and endangered species Primula sieboldii Hebert, P. 2009. Protocols for High- using nuclear microsatellites and Volume DNA Barcode Analysis. Ontario, chloroplast DNA. Conservation Genetics, Canada. 24 pp. 9(5): 1139–1147. Jahrl, J. 2013. Illegal Caviar Trade in Bulgaria and Hoque, S., Azhar, M. a H.B. and Deravi, F. 2011. Romania: Results of a market survey on ZOOMETRICS – Biometric Identification trade in caviar from sturgeons of Wildlife Using Natural Body Marks. (Acipenseridae). Vienna, Austria. 54 pp. International Journal of Bio-Science and Bio-Technology, 3(3): 45–54.

Jehle, R. and Hödl, W. 1998. Pits versus Kelepouris, T., Pramatari, K. y Doukidis, G. patterns: Effects of transponders on (2007). RFID-enabled traceability in the recapture rate and body condition of food supply chain. Industrial Management Danube crested newts (Triturus & Data Systems, 107(2): 183-200. dobrogicus) and common spadefoot toads (Pelobates fuscus). Herpetological Journal, Khor, J.H., Ismail, W., Younis, M.I., Sulaiman, 8(4): 181–186. M.K. and Rahman, M.G. 2011. Security problems in an RFID system. Wireless Johnson, S., Hoffmann, K., Irvin, P., Dykes, M., Personal Communications, 59(1): 17–26. Campbell, K.R., Campbell, T. and Harding, A. 2009. Evaluation of a new Kim, H.M., Oh, S.-H., Bhandari, G.S., Kim, C.-S. technique for marking anurans. Applied and Park, C.-W. 2014. DNA barcoding of Herpetology, 6(3): 247–256. Orchidaceae in Korea. Molecular ecology resources, 14(3): 499–507. Johnston, R. 1997. Effective vulnerability assessment of tamper-indicating seals. Kiyono, H. 2002. Japan’s Trade in Ivory. Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 25(4): TRAFFIC International, Cambridge, UK. 451–455. 29 pp.

Kagawa, A. and Leavitt, S.W. 2010. Stable Kleemann, L., Abdulai, A. and Buss, M. 2014. carbon isotopes of tree rings as a tool to Certification and Access to Export pinpoint the geographic origin of timber. Markets: Adoption and Return on Journal of Wood Science, 56(3): 175–183. Investment of Organic-Certified Pineapple Farming in Ghana. World Kanerva, M., Vehmas, A., Nikinmaa, M. and Development, 64: 79–92. Vuori, K. a. 2014. Spatial Variation in Transcript and Protein Abundance of Koziol, J. and Hoaglund, R. 2005. Innovative Atlantic Salmon during Feeding Migration security technologies for the transport of in the Baltic Sea. Environmental Science & milk. SECURITY, (1938): 38–44. Technology, 48(23): 13969–13977. Labelfish 2015. Labelfish | The Atlantic Network Kang, H., Park, H., Park, Y., Jung, M., Kim, B.C., on Genetic Control of Fish and Seafood Wallace, G. and Cho, G. 2014. Fully Roll- Labelling and Traceability. Available at: to-Roll Gravure Printable Wireless (13.56 http://labelfish.eu/. [Accessed: MHz) Sensor-Signage Tags for Smart 13/10/2015]. Packaging. Scientific Reports, 4: 2–8. Lahaye, R., van der Bank, M., Bogarin, D., Kashiha, M., Bahr, C., Ott, S., Moons, C.P.H., Warner, J., Pupulin, F., Gigot, G., Maurin, Niewold, T.A., Ödberg, F.O. and O., Duthoit, S., Barraclough, T.G. and Berckmans, D. 2013. Automatic Savolainen, V. 2008. DNA barcoding the identification of marked pigs in a pen floras of biodiversity hotspots. using image pattern recognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, Sciences of the United States of America, 93: 111–120. 105(8): 2923–8.

Kautenburger, R., Wannemacher, J. and Müller, Lau, W. 2014. Taking from the wild: moving P. 2004. Multi element analysis by X-ray towards sustainability in Hong Kong’s fluorescence: A powerful tool of ivory wildlife trade. Civic Exchange, Hong Kong. identification from various origins. 85 pp. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry, 260(2): 399–404.

Lee, E.J., Lee, Y.H., Moon, S.H., Kim, N.Y., Kim, Mai, N., Gretar Bogason, S., Arason, S., S.H., Yang, M.S., Choi, D.H. and Han, Víkingur Árnason, S. and Geir M.S. 2013. The identification of elephant Matthíasson, T. 2010. Benefits of ivory evidences of illegal trade with traceability in fish supply chains – case mitochondrial cytochrome b gene and studies. British Food Journal, 112(9): 976– hypervariable D-loop region. Journal of 1002. Forensic and Legal Medicine, 20(3): 174– 178. Manrique, V. 2015. Verónica Manrique (AGROCALIDAD) pers. Comm. Lin Goh, S. 2015. Soo Lin Goh (DoubleHelix - 30/06/2015. auditors for Certisource) pers. comm. 16/09/15 by email. Maralit, B. a., Aguila, R.D., Ventolero, M.F.H., Perez, S.K.L., Willette, D. a. and Santos, Ludwig, A. 2015. Identification of sturgeons and M.D. 2013. Detection of mislabeled paddlefish specimens in trade (Decision commercial fishery by-products in the 16.137) AC28 Inf. 18. 3 pp. Philippines using DNA barcodes and its implications to food traceability and Luvisi, A., Panattoni, A., Bandinelli, R., safety. Food Control, 33(1): 119–125. Rinaldelli, E., Pagano, M., Gini, B., Manzoni, G. and Triolo, E. 2010a. Mariani, S. (2011). Seafood genetic Radiofrequency Identification Tagging in identification: aiming our pipettes at the Ornamental Shrubs: An Application in right targets. Frontiers in Ecology and the Rose. HortTechnology, 20(6): 1037–1042. Environment, 10(1): 10-11.

Luvisi, A., Triolo, E., Rinaldelli, E., Bandinelli, Marko, P.B., Nance, H. a. and Guynn, K.D. 2011. R., Pagano, M. and Gini, B. 2010b. Genetic detection of mislabeled fish from Radiofrequency applications in grapevine: a certified sustainable fishery. Current From vineyard to web. Computers and Biology, 21(16): R621–R622. Electronics in Agriculture, 70(1): 256–259. Martin, R.B. 2012. A legal trade in rhino horn : Lyons, J. and Natusch, D. 2015. Methodologies Hobson’s choice. Rhino Survival Trust, for differentiating between wild and Johannesburg, South Africa. 45 pp. captive-bred CITES-listed snakes. AC28 Inf. 9. IUCN-SSC Boa and Python Specialist Martinez, I. and Jakobsen Friis, T. 2004. Group. 35 pp. Application of proteome analysis to seafood authentication. Proteomics, 4(2): MacNeil, J.E., Dharmarajan, G. and Williams, 347–54. R.N. 2011. Sala Marker: A code generator and standardized marking system for use Martinez, I. (2005). Report on techniques with visible implant elastomers. applicable to verify various traceability HERPETOLOGICAL CONSERVATION information. Trondheim: SINTEF. AND BIOLOGY, 6(2): 260–265. Martin-perez, M., Fernandez-Borras, J., Ibarz, MAGAP 2012. Sistema de Identificación y A., Felip, O., Fontanillas, R., Gutierrez, J. Trazabilidad Animal, Ecuador: S.I.T.A. and Blasco, J. 2013. Naturally occuring Ministerio de Agricultura, Ganadería, stable isotopes reflect changes in protein Acuacultura y Pesca (MAGAP). turnover and growth in gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata) juveniles under different dietary protein levels. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 61: 8924–8933.

Martín-Pérez, M., Fernández-Borrás, J., Ibarz, Traceability in Forest and Fishery A., Felip, O., Gutiérrez, J. and Blasco, J. Certification. Natural Resources Journal, 2011. Stable isotope analysis combined 52(2): 421–441. with metabolic indices discriminates between gilthead sea bream (Sparus Milliken, T. 2014. Illegal trade in ivory and rhino aurata) fingerlings produced in various horn: an assessment to improve law hatcheries. Journal of agricultural and food enforcement under the wildlife TRAPS chemistry, 59(18): 10261–70. project. TRAFFIC International, Cambridge, UK. Marx, C., Hustedt, M., Hoja, H., Winkelmann, T. and Rath, T. 2013. Investigations on Min, J.U. and Park, M. 2007. Electronic cargo laser marking of plants and fruits. seal for safe and secure supply chain Biosystems Engineering, 116(4): 436–446. traceability. Journal of Intl Logistics and Trade, 5(1): 47–56. Mateo Calderón, M.J. 2014. ¿Comemos tiburón?: Identificación molecular de carne de Mina, A.E., Ponti, A.K., Woodcraft, N.L., tiburón de venta en mercados y Johnson, E.E. and Saporito, R.A. 2015. pescaderías del Distrito Metropolitano de Variation in alkaloid-based microbial Quito. Universidad San Francisco de defenses of the dendrobatid poison frog Quito. Oophaga pumilio. Chemoecology, 25(4): 169–178. Mayo, M. and Watson, A.T. 2007. Automatic species identification of live moths. MINAM. (2015). Guía de identificación de Knowledge-Based Systems, 20(2): 195–202. orquídeas con mayor demanda comercial. Lima: MINAM. Mccarthy, M. a. and Parris, K.M. 2004. Clarifying the effect of toe clipping on Miraglia, M., Berdal, K.G., Brera, C., Corbisier, frogs with Bayesian statistics. Journal of P., Holst-Jensen, A., Kok, E.J., Marvin, Applied Ecology, 41(4): 780–786. H.J.P., Schimmel, H., Rentsch, J., van Rie, J.P.P.F. et al. 2004. Detection and McGough, N.H., Roberts, D.L., Brodie, C. and traceability of genetically modified Kowalczyk, J. 2006. CITES and Slipper organisms in the food production chain. Orchids. Kew Publishing, Royal Botanic Food and chemical toxicology : an Gardens Kew, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, international journal published for the United Kingdom. 90 pp. British Industrial Biological Research Association, 42(7): 1157–80. Mello, C. 2015. Claudia Mello (IBAMA) pers. comm. 28/08/15 by email. Monette, F. y van Bogart, M. (2009). The business case for track, trace and control. Mendes, R., Griffiths, A., Mariani, S., Sotelo, C., Avilable at: Velasco, A., Smith, C., Shorten, M., http://files.microscan.com/_att/45a4e6ab Verrez-Bagnis, V. and Silva, H. 2015. -cc07-4e94-88f5- Traceability and labelling of seafood in 3216d85ab93c/ttc_whitepaper.pdf. Atlantic area regions. IPMA, Lisbon, Portugal. 47 pp. Morris, S.A. 2010. Processing and Packaging that Protects the Food Supply Against Microtrace 2015. Microtaggant® Identification Intentional Contamination. Wiley Particles | Microtrace. Available at: Handbook of Science and Technology for http://www.microtracesolutions.com/tagg Homeland Security, 3(1): 1–16. ant-technologies/microtaggant- identification-particles. [Accessed: Morrison, C., Hovatter, K., Eackles, M., Spidle, 11/09/2015]. A. and King, T. 2005. Molecular identification of Cypripedioid orchids in Migone, A. and Howlett, M. 2012. From Paper international trade. Selbyana, 26(1,2): 196– Trails to DNA Barcodes: Enhancing 216.

MSC 2011. Certified fisheries: British Columbia initiative to DNA barcode amphibians and spiny dogfish. Available at: nonavian reptiles. Molecular Ecology https://www.msc.org/track-a- Resources, 13(2): 161–167. fishery/fisheries-in-the- program/certified/pacific/british- National Geographic 2015. The Human Toll of columbia-spiny-dogfish. [Accessed: Ivory Poaching. Available at: 6/10/2015]. http://www.nationalgeographic.com/trac king-ivory/. [Accessed: 4/09/2015]. MSC 2012. Certified fisheries: US Atlantic spiny dogfish. Available at: Natusch, D., Waller, T., Micucci, P. and https://www.msc.org/track-a- Lichtenschein, V. 2015. Develeoping CITES fishery/fisheries-in-the- non-detriment findings for snakes: example program/certified/north-west- primary evaluation. AC28 Inf.3. 42 pp. atlantic/us_atlantic_spiny_dogfish. [Accessed: 6/10/2015]. NCBI 2015. GenBank. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/. MSC 2014. Marine Stewardship Council Fisheries [Accessed: 12/10/2015]. Standard and Guidance v2.0. Marine Stewardship Council, London, UK. 290 Nielsen, L.L. and Kjær, E. 2008. Tracing timber pp. from forest to consumer with DNA markers. Copenhagen. 41 pp. MSC 2015a. Marine Stewardship Council Chain of Custody Standard Version 4.0. Marine Norton, T., Beier, J., Shields, L., Househam, A., Stewardship Council, London, UK. 17 pp. Bombis, E. and Liew, D. 2013. A guide to traceability: A practical approach to MSC 2015b. MSC in numbers. Available at: advance sustainability in global supply https://www.msc.org/business- chains. New York, US. 47 pp. support/key-facts-about-msc. [Accessed: 15/09/2015]. OECD 2000. Trade Measures in Multilateral Environmental Agreements. OECD Muellner, A.N., Schaefer, H. and Lahaye, R. Publishing, Paris, France. 216 pp. 2011. Evaluation of candidate DNA barcoding loci for economically important Ogden, R., Dawnay, N. and McEwing, R. 2009. timber species of the mahogany family Wildlife DNA forensics — Bridging the (Meliaceae). Molecular ecology resources, gap between conservation genetics and 11(3): 450–60. law enforcement. Endangered Species Research, 9(3): 179–195. Mundy-Taylor, V. and Crook, V. 2013. Into the deep: Implementing CITES measures for Palphramand, K.L., Walker, N., McDonald, R. a. commercially-valuable sharks and manta and Delahay, R.J. 2011. Evaluating seasonal rays. TRAFFIC, Cambridge, UK. 116 pp. bait delivery to badgers using rhodamine B. European Journal of Wildlife Research, Mundy-Taylor, V., Crook, V., Foster, S., Fowler, 57(1): 35–43. S., Sant, G. and Rice, J. 2014. A Framework to assist Authorities in making Non- Park, I., Kim, Y.J., Gil, H.W. and Kim, D. 2013. detriment Findings (NDFs) for species Evaluation of a Visible Implant listed in CITES Appendix II. Available at: Fluorescent Elastomer Tag in the https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/pr Greenling Hexagrammos otakii. Fisheries og/shark/docs/Shark NDF guidance incl and Aquatic Sciences, 16(1): 35–39. Annexes.pdf. [Accessed: 5/10/2015]. PEFC 2015. PEFC Homepage. The world’s largest Murphy, R.W., Crawford, A.J., Bauer, A.M., Che, forest certification organisation - PEFC. J., Donnellan, S.C., Fritz, U., Haddad, Avilable at: http://www.pefc.co.uk/. C.F.B., Nagy, Z.T., Poyarkov, N.A., Vences, [Accessed 14/10/2015]. M. et al. 2013. Cold Code: the global

Perner, H. 2015. Holger Perner (professional RESP 2015. Identification carrier for a global orchid grower in China) pers. comm. traceability information system for reptile 29/08/15 by email. skin. AC28 Doc. 14.2.2. 13 pp.

Phillips, C.T. and Fries, J.N. 2009. An evaluation Retief, K., West, A.G. and Pfab, M.F. 2014. Can of visible implant elastomer for marking stable isotopes and radiocarbon dating the federally listed Fountain darter and provide a forensic solution for curbing the San Marcos salamander. North illegal harvesting of threatened cycads? American Journal of Fisheries Journal of forensic sciences, 59(6): 1541–51. Management, 29(3): 529–532. RFID Journal LLC 2015. Frequently Asked Pillonel, L., Badertscher, R., Bütikofer, U., Questions - RFID Journal. Casey, M., Dalla Torre, M., Lavanchy, P., Meyer, J., Tabacchi, R. and Bosset, J. 2002. RhODIS 2015. eRhODISTM. Available at: Analytical methods for the determination https://www.erhodis.org/Home. of the geographic origin of Emmentaler [Accessed: 14/09/2015]. cheese. Main framework of the project; chemical, biochemical, microbiological, Richter, H., Gembruch, K. and Koch, G. 2015. colour and sensory analyses. European CITESwoodID - Introduction. Food Research and Technology, 215(3): 260–267. Van Rijswijk, W., Frewer, L.J., Menozzi, D. and Faioli, G. 2008. Consumer perceptions of Prada, M., Castro, E., Taylor, E., Puentes, V., traceability: A cross-national comparison Appeldoorn, R.S. and Daves, N. 2008. of the associated benefits. Food Quality Non-Detrimental Findings for the Queen and Preference, 19(5): 452–464. Conch (Strombus Gigas) in Colombia. NDF Workshop Case Studies, (Ninnes): 34. Riley, W.D., Ibbotson, A.T., Beaumont, W.R.C., Rycroft, P. and Cook, A.C. 2010. A Prunier, J., Kaufmann, B., Grolet, O., Picard, D., portable, cost effective, pass-through Pompanon, F. and Joly, P. 2012. Skin system to detect downstream migrating swabbing as a new efficient DNA salmonids marked with 12mm passive sampling technique in amphibians, and 14 integrated transponder tags. Fisheries new microsatellite markers in the alpine Research, 101(3): 203–206. newt (Ichthyosaura alpestris). Molecular Ecology Resources, 12(3): 524–531. Roberts, D. 2015. Dr David L. Roberts (Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology) Queen Conch Expert Workshop 2012. Report of pers. comm. to UNEP-WCMC 14/09/15 by the Queen Conch Expert Workshop. In: email. Queen Conch Expert Workshop, Miami, United States of America, 22-24 May 2012. Salas, M., Ranilla, J. and Espinoza, J. 2007. 4. Genetic relationships of phragmipedium species (orchidaceae) using amplified Queen Conch Working Group 2014. Summary fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) of the regional queen conch fisheries analysis. Lankesteriana, 7(3): 493–496. management and conservation plan: Measures. 1-11 pp. Saporito, R.A., Spande, T.F., Martin Garraffo, H. and Donnelly, M.A. 2009. Arthropod Ratnasingham, S. and Hebert, P. 2007. BOLD: Alkaloids in Poison Frogs: A Review of the The Barcode of Life Data System ‘Dietary Hypothesis’. Heterocycles, 79(1): (www.barcodinglife.org). Molecular 277. Ecology Notes, 7(3): 355–364. Sapsford, S.J., Roznik, E. a, Alford, R. and RESP 2014. Requirments for a traceability Schwarzkopf, L. 2014. Visible implant system for reptile skins. AC27 Doc. 19.4. 29 elastomer marking does not affect short- pp. term movements or survival rates of the

treefrog Litoria rheocola. Herpetologica, Wildlife Techniques Manual Volume 1: 70(1): 23–33. Research. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 230–257. Sato, T., Yoseda, K., Abe, O., Shibuno, T., Takada, Y., Dan, S. and Hamasaki, K. 2013. Simon, J. and Dörner, H. 2011. Growth, Growth of the coconut crab Birgus latro mortality and tag retention of small estimated from mark-recapture using Anguilla anguilla marked with visible passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags. implant elastomer tags and coded wire Aquatic Biology, 19(2): 143–152. tags under laboratory conditions. Journal of Applied Ichthyology, 27(1): 94–99. Schroeder, J., Cleasby, I.R., Nakagawa, S., Ockendon, N. and Burke, T. 2011. No Singapore AVA 2015. Communication from evidence for adverse effects on fitness of Singapore Agri-food & Veterinary fitting passive integrated transponders Authority. 1-2 pp. (PITs) in wild house sparrows Passer domesticus. Journal of Avian Biology, Singh, J., Singh, S.P., Desautels, K., Saha, K. and 42(3): 271–275. Olsen, E. 2010. An evaluation of the ability of RFID tags to withstand distribution of Science Exchange 2015. Gas Chromatography- fresh produce in the RPC pooling system. Mass Spectrometry. Available at: Packaging Technology and Science, 23(4): https://www.scienceexchange.com/servic 217–226. es/gc-mass-spec. [Accessed: 14/09/2015]. Singh, R.R., Goyal, S.P., Khanna, P.P., Secor, D. 2002. Inter-laboratory comparison of Mukherjee, P.K. and Sukumar, R. 2006. Atlantic and Mediterranean bluefin tuna Using morphometric and analytical otolith microconstituents. ICES Journal of techniques to characterize elephant ivory. Marine Science, 59(6): 1294–1304. Forensic science international, 162(1-3): 144–51. Seidel, F., Fripp, E., Adams, A. and Denty, I. 2012. Tracking sustainability: Review of Smith, K.G. 2001. Technical note. Forensic electronic and semi-electronic timber science international, 120(1-2): 160. tracking technologies. International Tropical Timber Organization. Sosa, V., Mejía-Saules, T., Cuéllar, M.A. and Vovides, A.P. 2013. DNA Barcoding in Selimović, Š., Camci-Unal, G., Dokmeci, M.R. Endangered Mesoamerican Groups of and Khademhosseini, A. 2013. Plants. The Botanical Review, 79(4): 469– Microtagging using QR codes. Lab Chip, 482. 13: 14–16. Soula, M., Navarro, A., Hildebrandt, S., Serrano, E., Prache, S., Chauveau-Duriot, B., Zamorano, M.J., Roo, J., Hernández-Cruz, Agabriel, J. and Micol, D. 2007. C.M. and Afonso, J.M. 2012. Evaluation of Traceability of grass-feeding in young beef VIE (Visible Implant Elastomer) and PIT using carotenoid pigments in plasma and (Passive Integrated Transponder) physical adipose tissue. Animal Science, 82(06): tagging systems for the identification of 909. red porgy fingerlings (Pagrus pagrus). Aquaculture International, 20(3): 571–583. Sherley, R.B., Burghardt, T., Barham, P.J., Campbell, N. and Cuthill, I.C. 2010. South African Department of Environmental Spotting the difference: Towards fully- Affairs 2012. Norms and standards for the automated population monitoring of marking of rhinoceros and rhinoceros African penguins Spheniscus demersus. horn, and for the hunting of rhinoceros for Endangered Species Research, 11(2): 101–111. trophy hunting purposes. 3-7 pp.

Silvy, N.J., Lopez, R.R. and Peterson, M.J. 2012. Stein, E.D., Martinez, M.C., Stiles, S., Miller, Techniques for marking wildlife. In: The P.E. and Zakharov, E. V. 2014. Is DNA

barcoding actually cheaper and faster Tzoulis, I. and Andreopoulou, Z. 2013. Emerging than traditional morphological methods: Traceability Technologies as a Tool for Results from a survey of freshwater Quality Wood Trade. Procedia bioassessment efforts in the United States. Technology, 8: 606–611. PLoS ONE, 9(4). Tzoulis, I.K., Andreopoulou, Z.S. and Suselbeek, L., Jansen, P.A., Prins, H.H.T. and Voulgaridis, E. 2014. Wood Tracking Steele, M.A. 2013. Tracking rodent- Information Systems to Confront Illegal dispersed large seeds with Passive Logging. 5(1): 9–17. Integrated Transponder (PIT) tags. Tatem, A. (Ed.). Methods in Ecology and U.S Government 2013. The Harmonized System. Evolution, 4(6): 513–519. Available at: http://www.export.gov/logistics/eg_main Sutharoj, P. 2008. RFID tunes in to help orchid _018119.asp. [Accessed: 8/10/2015]. exports bloom. Logistics Digest, 03/2008. UC Davis Stable Isotope Facility 2015. Carbon Taylor, G., Cockburn, S., Palmer, D. and Liddy, (13C) and Nitrogen (15N) Analysis Pricing P. 2012. Breeding activity of Chatham & Turnaround Time. Island taiko (Pterodroma magentae) monitored using PIT tag recorders. New UNCTAD 2014. Biotrade Designer’s Toolkit: Zealand Journal of Ecology, 36(3): 425–432. Yellow Anaconda (Eunectes notaeus). Geneva, Switzerland. 18 pp. ThisFish 2013. ThisFish | Seafood Traceability. Available at: http://thisfish.info/. Van, N.Q. 2004. Traceability system of fish [Accessed: 13/10/2015]. products-Legislation to implementation in selected countries. United Nations Torres, M. 2013. Electronic timber traceability. University-Fisheries Training Programme, ITTO Tropical Forest Update, 22(2): 3–4. Reykjav. 82 pp.

Torres, M. 2015. Micha Torres (ITTO project Versapak 2015. Versapak: Security Seals & leader in Peru) pers. comm. to UNEP- Tamper Evident Security Products. WCMC 04/09/15 by email. Available at: http://www.versapak.co.uk/security- Trace One 2015. Trace One - FMCG seals/all. [Accessed: 8/10/2015]. Management Software. Available at: http://traceone.com/en/. [Accessed: Villena, C. Carol Villena (Agro Oriente) pers. 12/10/2015]. comm. 10/2015).

Trace RegisterTM 2015. Trace RegisterTM. Vira, V., Ewing, T. and Miller, J. 2014. Out of Available at: Africa: mapping the global trade in illicit http://www.traceregister.com/. [Accessed: elephant ivory. 59 pp. 12/10/2015]. Vörös, J., Szalay, F. and Barabas, L. 2007. two TRAFFIC International 2012. ETIS. Available at: European Bombina A new method for http://www.etis-testing.org/. [Accessed: quantitative pattern analysis applied to 12/10/2015]. two european bombina species. Herpetological Journal, 17(September Tyler, M.J., Stone, D.J. and Bowie, J.H. 1992. A 2015): 97–103. novel method for the release and collection of dermal, glandular secretions Waller, T., Micucci, P., Menghi, O., Barros, M. from the skin of frogs. Journal of and Draque, J. 2011. The relevance of pharmacological and toxicological CBNRM for the conservation of the methods, 28(4): 199–200. Yellow Anaconda (Eunectes notaeus, CITES Appendix II) in Argentina. In: Abensperg-Traun, M., Roe, D. and

O’Criodain, C. (Eds.). CITES and CBNRM. Wuertz, S., Groper, B., Gessner, J., Kruger, T., Proceedings of an international Luckas, B. and Kruger, A. 2009. symposium on ‘The relevance of CBNRM to Identification of caviar from increasing the conservation and sustainable use of global aquaculture production - Dietary CITES-listed species in exporting capric acid as a labelling tool for CITES countries’, Vienna, Austria, 18-20 May 2011. implementation in caviar trade. 51–56 pp. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN and London, Available at: ISI:000272859100007. UK: IIED. 14. WWF and TRAFFIC 2014. Sharks: restoring the Walter, W.D., Anderson, C.W. and balance. A joint initiative of WWF and Vercauteren, K.C. 2012. Evaluation of TRAFFIC to conserve sharks and rays. remote delivery of Passive Integrated Hong Kong. 8 pp. Transponder (PIT) technology to mark large mammals. PloS one, 7(9): e44838. WWF-Germany 2014. IvoryID. Available at: http://www.ivoryid.org/signin. [Accessed: Wasser, S.K., Joseph Clark, W., Drori, O., 12/10/2015]. Stephen Kisamo, E., Mailand, C., Mutayoba, B. and Stephens, M. 2008. Younk, J.A., Herwig, B.R. and Pittman, B.J. 2010. Combating the illegal trade in African Short- and Long-Term Evaluation of elephant ivory with DNA forensics. Passive Integrated Transponder and Conservation biology : the journal of the Visible Implant Elastomer Tag Society for Conservation Biology, 22(4): Performance in Muskellunge. North 1065–71. American Journal of Fisheries Management, 30(1): 281–288. WCO 2012. HS Nomenclature 2012 Edition. Available at: Yu, X., Wang, J., Kays, R., Jansen, P. a, Wang, T. http://www.wcoomd.org/en/topics/nome and Huang, T. 2013. Automated nclature/instrument-and- identification of animal species in camera tools/hs_nomenclature_2012/hs_nomencl trap images. EURASIP Journal on Image ature_table_2012.aspx. [Accessed: and Video Processing, 52(1): 1–10. 2/10/2015]. Zabyelina, Y.G. 2014. The ‘fishy’ business: a WCO 2015. What is the Harmonized System qualitative analysis of the illicit market in (HS)? Available at: black caviar. Trends in Organized Crime, http://www.wcoomd.org/en/topics/nome 17(3): 181–198. nclature/overview/what-is-the- harmonized-system.aspx. [Accessed: Ziai, M.A. and Batchelor, J.C. 2014. Tamper- 2/10/2015]. Proof RFID Security Tag. In: 2014 Loughborough Antennas and Propogation West, J.B., Hurley, J.M. and Ehleringer, J.R. Conference (LAPC) 10-11 November 2014. 2009. Stable isotope ratios of marijuana. I. Loughborough. 711–712. Carbon and nitrogen stable isotopes describe growth conditions. Journal of Ziegler, H., Osmond, C.B., Stichler, W. and forensic sciences, 54(1): 84–9. Trimborn, P. 1976. Hydrogen isotope discrimination in higher plants: Wilson, P. 2012. CertiSource FAQ. Avilable at: Correlations with photosynthetic pathway http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5514 and environment. Planta, 128(1): 85–92. bc3be4b04038107880eb/t/551a5b72e4b0c5 65871d21dd/1427790706927/CertiSourceF Ziegler, S., Merker, S. and Jacob, D. 2012. AQ_v.02_EN_Approved.pdf. [Avilable at Geographic variation of stable isotopes in 14/10/2015]. African elephant ivory. Geophysical Research Abstracts, 14.

Photo Credits Cover Page: Barcode Close-Up by Philippa Willitts (CC BY-NC 2.0) via Flickr. Page 1: Flor de chuquirahua o flor del andinista by Raul Antonio Alvarez (CC BY 2.0) via Flickr. Page 2: Container by Glyn Lowe (CC BY 2.0) via Flickr. Page 5: Sniffer Dog by Johnson Barros (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) via Flickr. Page 6: Making surume (Dried Squid) in Otsuki, Kochi, Japan by Takanobu Shuji (CC 2.0) via Flickr. Page 6: MSC Ecolabel, Copyright Marine Stewardship Council. Page 7: Jungle on the Rio Napo, Ecuador by Alexander Schimmeck, (CC NC-ND 2.0) via Flickr. Page 7: FairWild logo, Copyright FairWild. Page 8: Kenworth – PER Trucking2 by TruckPF (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) via Flickr. Page 10: Fresh Cacao from São Tomé & Príncipe by Everjean (CC BY 2.0) via Flickr. Page 11: Logging Harvest by auntjojo (CC BY-ND 2.0) via Flickr. Page 12: Horses, up close by Megan Squire (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) via Flickr. Page 12: Timber marked with codes Kristina Osen. Page 12: Untitled [tattoed cat] by Sur Name (CC BY 2.0) via Flickr. Page 12: Tissue removal by Kristina Osen. Page 12: Baby cow by AHLN (CC BY 2.0) via Flickr. Page 13: Microtaggants®, Copyright Microtrace LLC. Page 13: VIE by Northwest Marine Technology. Page 13: Large VI ALpha by Northwest Marine Technology. Page 14: Trackable QR Code by Michael Kappel (CC BY-NC 2.0) via Flickr. Page 14: 125 kHz tag kit from TrossenRobotics by Tod Kurt (CC BY-NC 2.0) via Flickr. Page 15: IMGP3879 by Jonas Lönborg (CC BY-NC 2.0) via Flickr. Page 15: Sealed tag by SmartSign (CC BY 2.0) via Flickr. Page 16: DNA barcode by for the COI-5P sequence of Oophaga sylvatica from Ecuador, via BOLD database. Page 16: 454 GS FLX+ by Konrad Förstner (CC BY 2.0) via Flickr. Page 17: Sample of Coelogyne septemcostata leaves by Amy Hinsley. Page 23: Imbabura Tree Frog (Hypsiboas picturatus) by John Clare (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) via Flickr. Page 24: Thresher up close by Klaus Stiefel (CC BY-NC 2.0) via Flickr. Page 25: Roadside Timber Stack by David Wright (CC BY 2.0) via Flickr. Page 26: Certified timber in a log pond by CIFOR (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) via Flickr. Page 27: Myoxanthus serripetalus (Kraenzl.) Luer (1982) by Quimbaya (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) via Flickr. Page 28: Restrepia trichoglossa by Grufnik (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) via Flickr. Page 31: Ceratotherium simum by Pablo Sinovas Page 32: Vicuña by Sebastián Restrepo Calle (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) via Flickr. Page 33: Burmese Python Head by Florida Fish and Wildlife (CC BY-ND 2.0) via Flickr. Page 35: CITES labelled caviar container, copyright WWF. Page 36: Conch and Sea Grass, Grand Bahama by Dave Wilson (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) via Flickr.