01576-colombia coca survey 2005 eng

8/14/2019 01576-Colombia coca survey 2005 eng

1/118

Coca Cultivation Survey

Colombia

June2006

Government of Colombia


2/118


3/118

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2

Abbreviations

CICAD Inter-American Drug Abuse Control CommissionCOP Colombian PesosDANE National Department of StatisticsDEA US Drugs Enforcement AgencyDIRAN Colombian Anti-Narcotics Police

DNE National Narcotics OfficeDNP National Planning DepartmentICMP Illicit Crop Monitoring ProgrammeINCB International Narcotics Control BoardIDB Inter-American Development BankIDP Internally Displaced PeoplePDA Alternative Development ProgrammePCI Presidential Programme against Illicit CropsRSS Colombian Social Solidarity NetSIMCI II Integrated Illicit Crops Monitoring SystemUIAF Special Administrative Unit on Information and Financial AnalysisUNODC United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.US$ United States Dollars

AcknowledgementsThe following organizations and individuals contributed to the implementation of the 2005 coca cultivationsurvey in Colombia, and to the preparation of the present report:

Government of Colombia:

Ministry of Interior and JusticeNational Narcotics Office -DNEColombian Anti-Narcotics Police -DIRANMinistry of DefenceColombia Agency for International Cooperation ACCIPresidential Agency for Social Action and International Cooperation

UNODC:

Rodolfo Llins, SIMCI Project CoordinatorOrlando Gonzlez, Digital Processing ExpertSandra Rodrguez, Digital Processing ExpertZully Sosa, Digital Processing ExpertMaria Isabel Velandia, Digital Processing ExpertMartha Paredes, Research and Analysis ExpertLeonardo Correa, Field EngineerJuan Carlos Parra, Editing EngineerMartha Luz Gutierrez, Administrative AssistantJavier Espejo, Assistant Engineer

Juan Pablo Ardila, Assistant Engineer

Sandro Calvani, Representative for ColombiaGuillermo Garcia, National Programme Officer

Coen Bussink, Remote Sensing and GIS expert (UNODC Research and Analysis Section - ICMP)Denis Destrebecq, Regional Illicit Crop Monitoring Expert (UNODC Research and Analysis Section - ICMP)Anja Korenblik, Programme Manager (UNODC Research and Analysis Section - ICMP)Thibault le Pichon, Chief (UNODC Research and Analysis Section)Thomas Pietschmann, Research Officer (UNODC-Research and Analysis Section)Martin Raithelhuber, Programme Officer (UNODC-Research and Analysis Section)Javier Teran, Statistician (UNODC Research and Analysis Section ICMP)

The implementation of UNODCs Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme in the Andean countries and theColombia survey in 2005 was made possible thanks to financial contributions from the Governments of TheUnited States of America (USAID), The Netherlands and United Kingdom.


4/118


3

PREFACE

The worlds appetite for cocaine remains stable but uneven, declining in the United States while increasing inEurope. In 2005 more than two thirds of the supply came from Colombia (640 tons), where coca cultivationincreased by 8% over 2004: a discouraging outcome taking into account the resolute efforts of the

Colombian Government to eradicate this illicit cultivation.

However, this increase should be kept in perspective. The overall level of coca cultivation in Colombiaremains almost 50% below the peak recorded in 2000. Furthermore, country-wide aerial eradication hasbecome more difficult due to a growingly aggressive insurgency fuelled by the narco-economy (and viceversa).

A further factor affected this Colombia coca crop survey for 2005: the need for UNODC in co-operationwith the Government to develop a state of the art technique to measure (i.) the productivity of coca fields(coca leaves yield per hectare), and (ii.) the productivity of coca crops (hydrochloride yield per ton of leaves).In both instances it was found that current Colombia crops are more productive than previously estimated.As a result, Colombian cocaine production figures for 2004 and 2005 have been revised upwards to take intoaccount this new evidence.

These higher figures for the cocaine yield in Colombia suggest that there is more cocaine on the internationalmarket than previously believed. This may help explain why the price for cocaine has not gone up and thepurity of doses has not declined on the streets of consuming nations, despite the halving in cultivation since2000, the massive number of labs destroyed (1,953 in Colombia alone in 2005), and the dramatic (and stillunder-appreciated) increase in seizures world wide.

Clearly, the 2005 increase of the area under cultivation (+6,000 ha) despite large-scale aerial eradication(139,000 ha) is a warning signal to the Colombian government and to those, like UNODC, that haveparticipated in the joint drug control efforts.

This signal should alert us to refine drug control policies in Colombia in order to take into account the morechallenging security environment, and the inevitable difficulty of destroying coca fields fragmented in size,

dispersed on steep mountain slopes, embedded in protected national parks, and grown in proximity tointernational borders.

The overriding strategy of putting an end to coca cultivation through eradication must be pursuedrelentlessly. However, there should be a change in tactics using finer and more sustainable instruments. Inparticular, the second strong popular mandate received by President Uribe should make it possible for hisnew government to launch a major drive in favour of greater assistance to farmers in coca cultivation areas,accompanied by structural policies devised to redistribute land (especially land seized from drug lords) tointernally displaced people. In Colombia, like in other countries, poverty in the countryside and lack ofgovernment control in many areas enable large-scale illicit activity and the resulting violence.

While aerial spraying is cost-effective and keeps pressure on insurgents and organized crime, coca farmersneed to be convinced to eradicate their own fields. Voluntary eradication backed up by strong economic

incentives would give farmers a greater sense of ownership in the governments zero-coca policies, andincrease the chances of long-term success.

The international community must share the responsibility for reducing the worlds biggest supply of cocaine.Cocaine consuming nations need to reduce demand for the drug, especially in Europe where abuse is rising.I invite them all to be more generous towards Colombia.

Antonio Maria CostaExecutive Director

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime


5/118


4

TABLE OF CONTENT

1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................ ............................................................ 8

2 FINDINGS.............................................................................................................................................................. 10

2.1 CULTIVATION.................................................... ........................................................... .................................. 102.1.1 Coca Cultivation.......................................................................................................................................10

2.1.1.1 Regional analysis...............................................................................................................................................................192.1.1.2 Meta-Guaviare region........................................................................................................................................................21

2.1.1.3 Pacific region.....................................................................................................................................................................232.1.1.4 Central region ....................................................................................................................................................................25

2.1.1.5 Putumayo-Caqueta region..................................................................................................................................................272.1.1.6 Orinoco region...................................................................................................................................................................292.1.1.7 Amazonia region................................................................................................................................................................31

2.1.1.8 Sierra Nevada region .........................................................................................................................................................332.1.1.9 Possible areas of new cultivation .......................................................................................................................................35

2.1.1.10 Coca plant varieties............................... ...................... ...................... ...................... ......................... ...................... ............372.1.1.11 Coca cultivation and poverty ....................... ...................... ....................... ....................... .................... ....................... .......41

2.1.1.12 Coca cultivation and displacement .................... ....................... ....................... ...................... ..................... ...................... .43

2.1.1.13 Coca cultivation and the forest warden families programme....................... ......................... ....................... ......................452.1.1.14 Coca cultivation in National Parks............................. ........................ ....................... .................... ...................... ...............47

2.1.2 Reported Opium Poppy Cultivation..........................................................................................................50

2.2 NEW FINDINGS ON YIELD AND PRODUCTION ...................................................... ........................................... 532.2.1 Coca leaf yield and coca leaf production .................................................................................................532.2.2 Annual yield..............................................................................................................................................552.2.3 Coca leaf, coca paste and base production ..............................................................................................632.2.4 Revised Potential Cocaine production...................................................................................................... 682.2.5 Opium latex and heroin production .......................................................................................................... 70

2.3 PRICES..................................................... ........................................................... ............................................ 712.3.1 Coca leaf, coca base and cocaine prices ..................................................................................................712.3.2 Opium latex and heroin prices..................................................................................................................76

2.4 R EPORTED AERIAL SPRAYING AND MANUAL ERADICATION.................................................. ........................ 78

2.5 R EPORTED SEIZURE ..................................................... ........................................................... ........................ 83

3 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................................ 89

3.1 COCA CULTIVATION.................................................... ........................................................... ........................ 893.2 OPIUM POPPY CULTIVATION ............................................................ ........................................................... .... 993.3 YIELD AND PRODUCTION....................................................... ........................................................... ............ 1003.4 PRICES..................................................... ........................................................... .......................................... 110

4 ANNEX ................................................................................................................................................................. 111


6/118


5

Index of Maps

Map 1: Coca cultivation density in Colombia, 2005....................................................................................................9Map 2: Coca cultivation density change in Colombia, 2004-2005 ............................................................................12Map 3: Coca cultivation density in Colombia, 2004.................................................................................................. 14Map 4: Coca cultivation density in Colombia, 2005.................................................................................................. 14Map 5: Changes in coca cultivation in Colombia, 2001- 2005 .................................................................................. 15

Map 6: Coca cultivation density in the Andean region, 2005 ....................................................................................16Map 7: Coca cultivation by region in Colombia, 2001-2005.....................................................................................18Map 8: Coca cultivation density in the Meta-Guaviare region, Colombia 2005........................................................ 20Map 9: Coca cultivation density in the Pacific region, Colombia 2005.....................................................................22Map 10: Coca cultivation density in the Central region, Colombia 2005 .................................................................... 24Map 11: Coca cultivation density in the Putumayo-Caqueta region, Colombia 2005 ................................................. 26Map 12: Coca cultivation density in the Orinoco region, Colombia 2005.............. ..................................................... 28

Map 13: Coca cultivation density in the Amazonia region, Colombia 2005 ............................................................... 30Map 14: Coca cultivation density in the Sierra Nevada region, Colombia 2005 ......................................................... 32Map 15: Distribution of coca plants varieties in Colombia, 2005....................................... ......................................... 36Map 16: Index of livelihood conditions by department in 2003 and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005................... 40Map 17: Internal people displaced because of violence between 2000 and 2005 ........................................................ 42Map 18: Forest Warden Families Programme and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005.................... .......................... 44

Map 19: National Parks and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005....................................................... ......................... 46Map 20: Aerial perspective of the National Park Sierra de La Macarena and coca cultivation in 2005 ...................... 49Map 21: Coca yield by region in Colombia, 2005 ...................................................................................................... 52Map 22: Annual coca leaf production in Colombia, 2005 ...........................................................................................62Map 23: Aerial spraying and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005......................................................................... ...... 80Map 24: Destruction of clandestine laboratories and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005 .......................................... 85Map 25: Drug seizures by department and by drug type, Colombia 2005................................................................... 87

Map 26: Satellite images used for the Colombian coca cultivation survey 2005................................ ......................... 91Map 27: Study area distributed by region and Colombia coca cultivation, 2005........................................................ 95Map 28: Sample selection for yield survey by regions in Colombia, 2005................................................................ 101


7/118


6

SUMMARY FACTS SHEET

2004 Variation 2005

Net coca cultivation (rounded total)80,000 hectares

+ 8% 86,000 hectaresOf which Meta-Guaviare region 28,500 hectares - 9% 25,970 hectares

Pacific region 15,800 hectares + 12% 17,650 hectares

Central region 15,100 hectares + 4% 15,630 hectares

Putumayo-Caqueta region 10,900 hectares +28% 13,950 hectares

Elsewhere 10,100 hectares +24% 12,570 hectares

Reported accumulated aerial spraying ofcoca bush

136,550 hectares + 2 % 138,775 hectares

Reported manual eradication of coca bush 2,589 hectares 31,285 hectares

Average farm-gate price of coca pasteUS$ 810 /kg

COP 2,119,000 /kg+ 12 %- 0.5%

US$ 910 /kgCOP 2,109,000 /kg

Total farm-gate value of the production of coca leaf

and derivativesUS$ 843 million

in percent of GDP (US$ 122 billion in 2005) 0.7%

in percent of GDP of agricultural sector

(US$ 13.8 billion in 2005)6%

Number of households involved in cocacultivation

68,600households

Annual household gross income from theproduction of coca leaf and its derivatives

US$ 12,300

Annual use of fertilizers, herbicides andpesticides on coca fields

~85,000 mt~12 million litters

Potential production of cocaine 6401 mt 640mt

In percent of world cocaine production 68 % 70 %

Average cocaine priceUS$ 1,713 /kg

COP 4,600,000 /kg+ 9%- 6%

US$ 1,860/kgCOP 4,315,000/kg

Reported opium poppy cultivation (rounded) 3,950 hectares - 51% 1,950 hectares

Potential opium latex production 119 mt - 50% 59 mtPotential heroin production 5 mt - 50% 2.5 mt

Average farm-gate price of opium latex US$ 164 /kg + 40% US$ 230 /kg

Average heroin price US$ 7,635 /kg + 19% US$ 9,050/kg

Reported seizure of cocaine 149,297 kg + 16% 173,265 kg

Reported seizure of heroin 773 kg - 4% 745 kg

Reported destruction of illegal laboratories2 1,865 + 5% 1,953

1

Cocaine production for 2004 has been revised following the field findings obtained in 2005.2

Includes laboratories processing coca paste/base, cocaine hydrochloride, heroin, morphine, potassium, permanganate,and non specified.


8/118


7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Through its global Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme, UNODC has been assisting the ColombianGovernment in the implementation and refinement of a national coca monitoring system since1999. Annual surveys have been produced since then and the present report provides the findingsof the coca survey for 2005.

The results of the survey showed that, at the end of December 2005, 86,000 hectares of coca werecultivated in 23 out of the 32 Colombian departments. This represents an increase of 6,000hectares (or + 8%) since 2004 when coca cultivation reached 80,000 hectares. This was the firstannual increase recorded after four consecutive annual decreases between 2000 and 2004. The2005 level of coca cultivation remained however much lower (- 47%) than the peak level of163,000 hectares recorded in 2000.

The most important increase between 2004 and 2005 took place in the region of Putumayo-Caqueta (+28%). However, most of coca cultivation continued to take place in the region of Meta-Guaviare (30% of the countrys cultivation). In fact, 78% of the 2005 cultivation took place in justseven departments, the same seven departments that also accounted for 78% of 2004 total

cultivation: Meta, Nario, Putumayo, Guaviare, Vichada, Antioquia and Caqueta.

It was also noted that the average field size decreased from 1.30 hectares in 2004 to 1.13 hectaresin 2005. This could reflect farmers attempts to avoid detection and aerial spraying. Between 2004and 2005, aerial spraying continued to be intense and was above 130,000 hectares for the fourthconsecutive year. In 2005, a total of 138,775 hectares were sprayed. In addition, the governmentalso reported the manual eradication of 31,285 hectares, a record compared to previous levels of2,600 hectares in 2004 and 4,011 hectares in 2003. The total of both types of eradication (sprayingand manual) amounted to 170,060 hectares in 2005.

Between May 2005 and February 2006, the Colombian Government jointly with UNODCimplemented a coca leaf yield survey in Colombia. Samples of fresh coca leaves were harvested

from 746 coca plots selected among 463 coca fields, and 1,389 coca farmers were interviewed.The results of this survey indicated that the coca leaf yield were higher than previously thought,establishing at 6,300 kg/hectare/yr of fresh coca leaf (equivalent to 2,700 kg/hectare/yr of sun-driedcoca leaf). With the information provided by the farmers, the average annual yield per hectare forpure cocaine hydrochloride reached 7.7 kg/hectare, compared to 4.7 kg/hectare previously used.

At the farm-gate level, the illegal market of coca leaf and its derivatives amounted to a gross-valueof US$ 843 million, equivalent to 0.7% of the 2005 GDP and 6% of the GDP of the agriculturalsector. It should be noted however that this value does not take into account production costs likeherbicides, pesticides, fertilizers and wages. The coca leaf yield survey also enabled to estimatethe total number of households involved in coca farming at about 68,600 households. The farmgate value thus represents an annual gross income per household of US$12,300, equivalent to an

annual per capita gross income of US$ 2,500. By comparison, the GDP per capita in Colombia in2005 was estimated by the National Department of Statistics at US$ 2,700.

With the results of the field survey, it was possible to estimate that coca farmers used about 85,000metric tons of fertilizers and pesticides in their coca fields in 2005, together with about 12 millionliters of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides. It was also interesting to note that 129,000 liters ofglyphosate and round-up were sprayed by farmers on their coca fields, two herbicides used in theaerial spraying of coca cultivation. However farmers concentrations were probably lower than theconcentration used for aerial spraying.


9/118


8

1 INTRODUCTION

The objectives of UNODCs Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme (ICMP) are to establishmethodologies for data collection and analysis, to increase the governments capacity to monitorillicit crops on their territories and to assist the international community in monitoring the extent andevolution of illicit crops in the context of the elimination strategy adopted by the Member States atthe U.N. General Assembly Special Session on Drugs in June 1998. ICMP presently covers sevencountries: Colombia, Bolivia and Peru for coca; Afghanistan, Laos and Myanmar for opium andMorocco for cannabis.

During the 1980s and 1990s, Colombia became the country with the largest illicit coca growingarea and cocaine production in the world. Illicit coca cultivation in the country expanded steadilythroughout this period, in particular in remote areas of the Amazon basin. Although, cocacultivation started to decrease in 2001, Colombia still remains the largest coca-growing country inthe world.

UNODC has supported the monitoring of illicit crops since 1999, and has produced seven annualsurveys. In October 2003, UNODC signed a new agreement with the Colombian government to

continue and expand monitoring and analysis work. In this context, the SIMCI II project hasestablished to facilitate the implementation of additional tasks in the framework of an integratedapproach to the analysis of the drug problem in Colombia. The project also supports the monitoringof related problems such as fragile ecosystems, natural parks, indigenous territories, the expansionof the agricultural frontier and deforestation. It provides Geographic Information System support tothe governments alternative development projects and its Forest Families Warden Programme.

The new project foresees the creation of an Inter-Institutional Committee permanently assigned tothe project in order to ensuring the transfer of know how to the national beneficiary institutions.SIMCI II is a joint project between UNODC and the Colombian government, represented byMinistry of Interior and Justice and the International Cooperation Agency. The national counterpartand director of the project is the head of the Ministry of Interior and Justice.

The project is managed by a technical coordinator and composed of engineers and technicians:four digital image processing specialists, one field engineer, a cartographic technician, a researchand analysis specialist, two assistant engineers and an administrative assistant. The team isintegrated on permanent basis by technicians from DIRAN and National Parks Administration itsupports several studies and investigations for government and private institutions, related to landuse, environment, licit crops, etc. SIMCI provides to their experts, access to its Spatial InformationData Bank, transfer of technology and guidance to achieve their goals. Organizations thatbenefited from SIMCI support include DANE, local governments, the National Federation of CoffeeGrowers, NGOs as well as other UN agencies and projects.


10/118

Pacific

Ocean

Caribbean Sea

RoM

a

gdalena

RoM

eta

Ro Vichad

a

Ro

Cauca

RoM

agda

len

a

Ro G

uaviare

RoPutuma

yo

RoCaquet

RoArauca

Ro

Atrato

PANAMA

RoAmazonas

Ro I

nrida

R

o

Orino

co

Vichada

Vaups

Valle

Tolima

Sucre

Santander

Risaralda

Quindo

Putumayo

Norte deSantander

Nario

Meta

Magdalena

LaGuajira

HuilaGuaviare

Guaina

Cundinamarca

Crdoba

Choc

Cesar

Cauca

Casanare

Caquet

Caldas

Boyac

Bolvar

Atlntico

AraucaAntioquia

Amazonas

VENEZUELA

PERU

ECUADOR

BRAZIL

Neiva

Tumaco

San Jos

Popayn

PuertoAss

Cucut

Cartagena

Pasto

Cali

Florencia

Medelln

Barranquilla

Bogot

Mit

Leticia

Arauca

PuertoCarreo

75W

75W 70W

70W5S

5S

0

0

5N 5

N

10N

10N

South America

Source: Government of Colombia - National monitoring system supported by UNODCThe boundaries and names shown and the designations used in this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations

Coca cultivation density in Colombia, 2005

Colombia

Geographic coordinates WGS 84

1500 300km

Cultivation density

International boundariesDepartment boundaries

0.1 - 1.0

1.1 - 4.0

> 4.0

(ha/km)


11/118


10

2 FINDINGS

2.1 CULTIVATION

2.1.1 COCA CULTIVATION

In 2005, the total area under coca cultivation in Colombia increased by 6,000 hectares, a 8%increase compared to previous years estimate of 80,000 hectares. This is the first increasefollowing four consecutive years of annual decreased in Colombia, between 2000 and 2004.During that period, coca cultivation decreased by 51% and the 2005s area under coca cultivationis 47% lower compared to the peak annual estimate of 163,000 hectares in 2000.

Similarly to the previous four surveys, the 2005 survey represented the situation as of the end ofthe year, in this case as of December 2005. As was the case last year, it covered the wholecountry and detected coca cultivation in 23 departments out of 32. In 2005, the area under cocacultivation represents 0.08% of the total territory.

Figure 1. Coca cultivation in Colombia, 1995 2005 (in hectares)

Sources United States Department of State National Monitoring System Supported by UNODC

-

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

Hectares

Hectares 51,000 67,000 79,000 102,000 160,000 163,000 145,000 102,000 86,000 80,000 86,000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

The increase in coca cultivation between 2004 and 2005 took place despite high level of aerialspraying, which in 2005 reached 138,780 hectares. In fact, aerial spraying of coca cultivation hasremained above 130,000 hectares since 2002. In 2005, the Colombian Government also reported

the additional manual eradication of 31,285 hectares of coca cultivation. This level of manualeradication was unprecedented, as it only reached 2,700 hectares in 2003 and 4,000 hectares in2004.


12/118


11

Table 1: Stable and new fields of coca bush in 2005

Identified in 2004 and 2005 Not detected in 2004 Total 2005

RegionNumberof fields

% oftotalfields

Area(hectares)

% oftotalarea

Numberof fields

% oftotalfields

Area(hectares)

% oftotalarea

TotalFields

Total Area(hectares)

Meta-Guaviare 7,958 42 7,896 30 10,801 58 18,066 70 18,759 25,963

Pacific 5,609 33 3,829 22 11,551 67 13,803 78 17,160 17,633

Central 4,067 30 2,662 17 9,340 70 12,970 83 13,407 15,632Putumayo-Caquet

2,969 27 2,831 20 8,028 73 11,121 80 10,997 13,951

Orinoquia 2,386 49 3,076 32 2,488 51 6,634 68 4,874 9,709

Amazonia 575 38 708 31 953 62 1,612 70 1,528 2,320

Sierra Nevada 195 34 112 21 386 66 430 80 581 542

TOTAL 23,759 35 21,114 25 43,547 65 64,636 75 67,306 85,750

The comparison of the position of the coca fields in 2004 and 2005 revealed that about 65% of thefields were in a different position or at least not observed in 2004 for various reasons (aerialspraying, recently harvested, recently planted, etc) and therefore not in production and notaccounted for in the 2004 census. This is to say that not necessary all of these coca fields can bequalified as new fields planted in 2005 because its identification as new is not referred to the age ofthe cultivation but to the position of the field.

For a better assessment of the dynamic of coca cultivation in Colombia, a comparison was madebetween the position of the coca fields identified in 2005 and the position of the fields identifiedbetween 2001 and 2004. In total, 44% of the fields identified in 2005 had never been detectedbefore. Such observation suggests a high mobility of coca cultivation in Colombia.

Table 2: Stable and new fields of coca bush in 2001-2005

Stable 2001-2005 New in 2005 Total 2005

RegionNumberof fields

% oftotalfields

Area(hectares)

% oftotalarea

Numberof fields

% oftotalfields

Area(hectares)

% oftotalarea

TotalFields

Total Area(hectares)

Meta-Guaviare 12,728 68 12,516 48 6,031 32 13,446 52 18,759 25,963

Pacific 8,750 51 5,744 33 8,410 49 11,888 67 17,160 17,633Putumayo-Caquet

6,160 56 6,178 40 4,837 44 9,454 60 10,997 15,632

Central 5,806 43 3,387 24 7,601 57 10,565 76 13,407 13,951

Orinoquia 3,106 64 4,487 46 1,768 36 5,223 54 4,874 9,709

Amazonia 786 51 997 43 742 49 1,323 57 1,528 2,320

Sierra Nevada 259 45 151 28 322 55 391 72 581 542

TOTAL 37,595 56 29,840 39 29,711 44 52,290 61 67,306 85,750

The analysis of the census data also showed that the average coca field size decreased from 1.3hectares in 2004 to 1.13 hectares in 2005 (-13%). A possible explanation could be that farmers arereducing the size of their coca fields to avoid detection and aerial spraying.


13/118

Pacific

Ocean

Caribbean Sea

PANAMA VENEZUELA

PERU

ECUADOR

BRAZIL

Vichada

Vaups

Valle

Tolima

Sucre

Santander

Risaralda

Quindo

Putumayo

Norte deSantander

Nario

Meta

Magdalena

LaGuajira

Huila

Guaviare

Guaina

Cundinamarca

Crdoba

Choc

Cesar

Cauca

Casanare

Caquet

Caldas

Boyac

Bolvar

Atlntico

AraucaAntioquia

Amazonas

Neiva

Tumaco

San Jos

Popayn

PuertoAss

Cucut

Cartagena

Pasto

Cali

Florencia

Medelln

Barranquilla

Bogot

Mit

Leticia

Arauca

PuertoCarreo

75W

75W 70W

70W5S

5S

0

0

5N

5N

10N

10N

South America


Coca cultivation density change in Colombia, 2004 - 2005

Colombia


1500 300kmInternational boundaries

Department boundaries

Strong decrease

Decrease

StableIncrease

Strong increase


14/118


13

In absolute numbers, the most important increases of coca crops between 2004 and 2005 werenoted in the departments of Putumayo (+ 4,600 hectares) in the Southern part of the country andVichada (+3,100 hectares) in the Orinoco region bordering Venezuela. The increase in Putumayocorresponded to doubling the area under coca cultivation between 2004 and 2005, from 4,390hectares to 8,960 hectares. Putumayo used to be the centre of coca cultivation, with 66,000hectares in 2000. Coca cultivation had strongly declined until 2004, but this years increase couldindicate a return of farmers to coca cultivation.

The largest reductions of coca crops took place in the departments of Norte de Santander (- 2,200hectares) and Caqueta (- 1,500 hectares). The strong decrease in Norte de Santander, at theborder with Venezuela, meant that there was a small coca cultivation left in 2005 in thisdepartment, with less than 1,000 hectares. In 2005 Norte de Santander was among thedepartments with the lowest levels of coca cultivation.

Compared to 2004, Meta despite a decrease of 1,430 hectares - and Nario remained the firsttwo departments in terms of coca cultivation, together accounting for 36% of the total area undercoca cultivation in the country. In fact 78% of the 2005 cultivation took place in just sevendepartments, the same seven departments that also accounted for 78% of 2004 total cultivation:

Meta, Nario, Putumayo, Guaviare, Vichada, Antioquia and Caqueta.

Table 3: Coca cultivation by department in Colombia, 1999 2005 (hectares)

DepartmentMar-1999

Aug-2000

Nov-2001

Dec-2002

Dec-2003

Dec-2004

Dec-2005

% Change2004-2005

% of2005total

Meta 11,384 11,123 11,425 9,222 12,814 18,740 17,305 -8% 20%

Nario 3,959 9,343 7,494 15,131 17,628 14,154 13,875 -2% 16%

Putumayo 58,297 66,022 47,120 13,725 7,559 4,386 8,963 104% 10%

Guaviare 28,435 17,619 25,553 27,381 16,163 9,769 8,658 -11% 10%

Vichada 4,935 9,166 4,910 3,818 4,692 7,826 67% 9%

Antioquia 3,644 2,547 3,171 3,030 4,273 5,168 6,414 24% 7%Caquet 23,718 26,603 14,516 8,412 7,230 6,500 4,988 -23% 6%

Bolvar 5,897 5,960 4,824 2,735 4,470 3,402 3,670 8% 4%

Crdoba 1,920 117 652 385 838 1,536 3,136 104% 4%

Cauca 6,291 4,576 3,139 2,120 1,443 1,266 2,705 114% 3%

Arauca 978 2,749 2,214 539 1,552 1,883 21% 2%

Choc 250 354 453 323 1,025 219% 1%

Santander 2,826 415 463 632 1,124 981 -13% 1%

Amazonas 532 784 625 783 897 15% 1%

N. de Santander 15,039 6,280 9,145 8,041 4,471 3,055 844 -73% 1%

Guaina 853 1,318 749 726 721 752 4% 1%

Vaups 1,014 1,493 1,918 1,485 1,157 1,084 671 -38% 1%

Boyac 322 245 118 594 359 342 -5% 0.4%

Guajira 321 385 354 275 556 329 -41% 0.4%

Magdalena 521 200 480 644 484 706 213 -70% 0.2%

Caldas 54 358 189 -47% 0.2%

Cundinamarca 66 22 57 57 71 56 -15% 0.1%

Valle del Cauca 76 184 111 37 45 28 -33% 0.03%

TOTAL 160,119 162,510 144,807 102,071 86,340 80,350 85,750 +6.7%

Rounded Total 160,000 163,000 145,000 102,000 86,000 80,000 86,000 + 7%

Departmentaffected

12 21 22 21 23 23 23

Country coverage 12% 41% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%


15/118

Pac

ific

Ocean

CaribbeanSea

RoMagda

lena

Ro

Met

a

Ro

Vichad

a

RoCauca

RoM

agda

lena

Ro

Guav

iar

e

RoPutum

ayo

Ro

Caqu

et

RoAra

uca

RoAtrato

PANAM

A

RoAma

zonas

Ro

In

rida

RoOrino

co

Vichada

Vaups

Valle

Tolima

Sucre

Santander

Risaralda

Quindo

Putumayo

Nortede

Santander

Nario

Meta

Magdalena

La

Guajira

Huila

Gu

aviare

Guaina

Cundinamarca

Crdoba

Choc

Cesar

Cauca

Casanare

Caquet

Caldas

Boyac

Bolvar

Atlntico

Arauca

Antioquia

Amazonas

VENEZUELA

PERU

ECUA

DOR

BRAZIL

Neiva

SanJos

Popayn

PuertoAss

Cucut

Cartagena

Pasto

Cali

Florencia

Medelln

Barranquilla

Bogot

Mit

Leticia

Arauca

Puerto

Carreo

Tumaco

75W

75W

70W

70W

5S

5S

0

0

5N

5N

10N

10N

SouthAmerica

Cocacultivationdensity

inColombia,

2004

Colombia

GeographiccoordinatesWGS84

150

0

300 km

Cultivat

iondensity

Internationalboundaries

Departmentboundaries

0.1-1.0

1.1-4.0

>

4.0

(h

a/km)

Source:GovernmentofColombia-Nationalmonitoringsystem

supportedbyUNODC

TheboundariesandnamesshownandthedesignationsusedinthismapdonotimplyofficialendorsementoracceptancebytheUnitedNations

Pac

ific

Ocean

CaribbeanSea

RoMagda

lena

Ro

Met

a

Ro

Vichad

a

RoCaucaRo

Mag

da

lena

Ro

Guavia

re

RoPutu

mayo

Ro

Caqu

et

RoAra

uca

RoAtrato

PANAMA

RoAma

zonas

Ro

Inrida

RoOrino

co

Vichada

Vaups

Valle

Tolima

Sucre

Santander

Risaralda

Quin

do

Putumayo

Nortede

Santander

Nario

Meta

Magdalena

La

Guajira

Huila

Guaviare

Guaina

Cundinamarca

Crd

oba

Choc

Cesar

Cauca

Casanare

Caquet

Caldas

Boyac

Bolvar

Atlntico

Arauca

A

ntioquia

Amazonas

VENEZUELA

PERU

ECUADOR

BRAZIL

Neiva

SanJos

Popayn

PuertoAss

Cucut

Cartagena

Pasto

Cali

Florencia

Mede

lln

Barranquilla

Bogot

Mit L

eticia

Arauca

Puerto

Carreo

Tumaco

75W

75W

70W

70W

5S

5S

0

0

5N

5N

10N

10N

Cocac

ultivationdensityinColom

bia,

2005

Cultivationdensity

Internationalboundaries

Departmentboundarie

s

0.1-1.0

1.1-4.0

>4.0

(ha/km)

GeographiccoordinatesWGS84

150

0

300 km

SouthAmerica

Colombia


16/118

Pacific

Ocean

Caribbean Sea

RoM

a

gdalena

RoM

eta

Ro Vichad

a

Ro

Cauca

RoM

agda

len

a

Ro G

uaviare

RoPutuma

yo

RoCaquet

RoArauca

Ro

Atrato

PANAMA

RoAmazonas

Ro I

nrida

R

o

Orino

co

Vichada

Vaups

Valle

Tolima

Sucre

Santander

Risaralda

Quindo

Putumayo

Norte deSantander

Nario

Meta

Magdalena

LaGuajira

Huila

Guaviare

Guaina

Cundinamarca

Crdoba

Choc

Cesar

Cauca

Casanare

Caquet

Caldas

Boyac

Bolvar

Atlntico

AraucaAntioquia

Amazonas

VENEZUELA

PERU

ECUADOR

BRAZIL

Neiva

Tumaco

San Jos

Popayn

PuertoAss

Cucut

Cartagena

Pasto

Cali

Florencia

Medelln

Barranquilla

Bogot

Mit

Leticia

Arauca

PuertoCarreo

75W

75W 70W

70W5S

5S

0

0

5N

5N

10N

10N

South America


Changes in coca cultivation in Colombia, 2001 - 2005

Colombia


1500 300kmInternational boundaries


Abandonned coca fields

Stable coca fields

New coca fields


17/118


18/118


19/118

Pacific

Ocean

CaribbeanSea

PANAM

A

Central

Meta -Guaviare

Putumayo -Caquet

Amazonia

Orinoco

Pacific

Sierra Nevada

Vichada

Vaups

Valle

Tolima

Sucre

Santander

Risaralda

Quindo

Putumayo

Norte deSantander

Nario

Meta

Magdalena

La Guajira

Huila

Guaviare

Guaina

Cundinamarca

Crdoba

Choc

Cesar

Cauca

Casanare

Caquet

Caldas

Boyac

Bolvar

Atlntico

AraucaAntioquia

Amazonas

VENEZUELA

PERU

ECUADOR

BRAZIL

Tumaco

Neiva

PuertoAss

Popayn

Cucut

Cartagena

Pasto

Cali

Florencia

Medelln

Barranquilla

Bogot

Mit

Leticia

Arauca

PuertoCarreo

75W

75W 70W

70W5S

5S

0

0

5N

5N

10N

10N

South America


Coca cultivation by region in Colombia, 2001 - 2005

Colombia

International boundaries


Coca cultivation (ha)

17,6

30

25,96

0

15,6

30

13,9

50

9,7

10

540

2,3

20


1500 300km

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005


20/118


19

-

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

Meta-

Guaviare

Pacific Central Putumayo-

Caqueta

Orinoco Amazonian Sierra Nevada

hec

tares

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

2.1.1.1 Regional analysis

In 2005, 46% of the coca cultivation in Colombia took place in the two traditional coca growingregions of Meta-Guaviare and Putumayo-Caqueta, both situated in the south-eastern part of thecountry. In absolute terms, the largest increases took place in Orinoco (+ 3,459 hectares), in thenorth-eastern part of the country bordering Venezuela, and Putumayo-Caqueta (+ 3,063 hectares),a traditional region for coca cultivation, bordering Ecuador. An important decrease of cocacultivation took place in the northern region of Sierra Nevada (- 57%), but in absolute numbers, thisonly represented a decrease of 540 hectares. Coca cultivation remained relatively stable (between+/- 10%) in Meta-Guaviare and the central region.

Table 5: Coca cultivation in Colombia by region 2001 - 2005 (in hectares)

Region 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

%Change2004 -2005

% of2005total

Meta-Guaviare 36,978 36,603 28,977 28,507 25,963 -9% 30%

Pacific 11,171 17,362 19,561 15,789 17,633 12% 21%Central 18,474 14,829 15,389 15,081 15,632 4% 18%Putumayo-Caqueta

61,636 22,137 14,789 10,888 13,951 28% 16%

Orinoco 11,915 7,124 4,357 6,250 9,709 55% 11%Amazonia 3,768 3,018 2,508 2,588 2,320 -10% 3%Sierra Nevada 865 998 759 1,262 542 -57% 1%Rounded Total 145,000 102,000 86,000 80,000 86,000 7% 100%

Figure 3. Coca cultivation in Colombia by region 2001 - 2005 (in hectares)


21/118

RoM

eta

RoVich

ada

Ro Guaviare

RoPutu

mayo

RoCaquet

RoInri

da

RoCagu

n

Guaviare

RoVaupe

s

Vichada

Vaups

Tolima

Santander

Putumayo

MetaHuila

Guaina

Cundinamarca

Casanare

Caquet

Caldas

Boyac

AraucaAntioquia

Amazonas

Miraflores

Calamar

El Retorno

LaMacarena

San Jos

del Guaviare

PuertoConcordia

PuertoRico

VistaHermosa

MapiripnPuertoLleras

SanJuande Arama

Mesetas

ElCastillo

LaUribe

San Martn

San CarlosGuaroaSan Luis de

Cubarral

Guamal Acacias Villavicencio

Cumaral

Puerto Lpez

Cabuyaro

PuertoGaitn

Yopal

Miraflores

Bogot

San Jos

Mit

74W

74W

72W

72W

0

0

2N

2N

4N

4N

6N

6N

COLOMBIAPAN

AMA

VENEZUELA

PERU

ECUADORBRAZIL

Source: Goverment of Colombia - National monitoring system supported by UNODCThe boundaries and names shown and the designations used in this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations

Coca cultivation density in the Meta-Guaviare region, Colombia 2005

0 200km

100

Geographic coordinates WGS 84PERU

Cultivation density(ha/km)



Meta Guaviare Region

RoadsMunicipality boundaries

Vaups

> 8

0.1 - 1.0

1.1 - 2.0

2.1 - 4.0

4.1 - 8.0


22/118


21

2.1.1.2 Meta-Guaviare region

Table 6: Coca cultivation in Meta-Guaviare, 1999 2005

Department 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005% Change2004-2005

Meta 11,384 11,123 11,425 9,222 12,814 18,740 17,305 -8%Guaviare 28,435 17,619 25,553 27,381 16,163 9,769 8,658 -11%Total 39,819 28,742 36,978 36,603 28,977 28,509 25,970 Annual trend -28% 29% -1% -21% -2% -9%

In 2004 and 2005, the department of Meta remained the department with the largest level of cocacultivation, even though coca cultivation decreased of 8%, from 18,740 hectares in 2004 to 17,300hectares in 2005. The department of Meta represented 20% of the national coca crops.

In 2005, a record of 14,500 hectares of coca cultivation were sprayed in 2005 over Metadepartment. This represented 55% of the total aerial spraying in the region, though coca cultivationin Meta represented 67% of the total coca crops for both departments and the highest level ofcultivation using high agro-technical efficiency.

Between 2004 and 2005, in the department of Guaviare, coca cultivation decreased from 9,769hectares to 8,658 hectares (-11%). At the same time, aerial spraying decreased from 30,900hectares in 2004 to 11,900 hectares in 2005.

Among the thirteen national parks surveyed, the National Park of Sierra de la Macarena, locatedwithin Meta department, experienced the largest level of coca cultivation within a protected area in2005, with 3,354 hectares. This represented an increase of 24% between 2004 and 2005.However, the increase is mostly due to a better interpretation of the coca fields in 2005 due to theabsence of clouds in the images of that year.

Guaviare was the department where coca cultivation first appeared in Colombia at the end of theseventies. Since then coca cultivation remained important in the department. However, anencouraging decrease has been noted in the past few years and the 8,650 hectares observed in2005, only represented 32% of the 27,381 hectares observed in 2002, mainly owing to importantaerial spraying campaigns. In 2005, Guaviare accounted for 10% of the national total.

Coca field of high agro-technical efficiency in Meta department


23/118

Pacific

Ocean

RoC

auca

Ro

Magdal

ena

RoAtrato

Ro C

ag

PANAMA

ECUADOR

RoSanJuan

Ro

Pata

Valle

Tolima

Sucre

Putumayo

Nario

MetaHuila

Cundinamarca

Crdoba

Choc

Cauca

Caquet

Caldas

Bolvar

Antioquia

Montera

Neiva

Manizales

Ibagu

Tumaco

Quibd

Mocoa

Neiva

Popayn

Pasto

Cali

Florencia

Medelln

Bogot

78W

78W

76W

76W

0

0

2N

2N

4N

4N

6N

6N

8N

8N

COLOMBIA

PANAMA

VENEZUELA

PERU

ECUADORBRAZIL


Coca cultivation density in the Pacific region, Colombia 2005

0 200km

100





Pacific Region

Roads

> 8

0.1 - 1.0

1.1 - 2.0

2.1 - 4.0

4.1 - 8.0


24/118


23

2.1.1.3 Pacific region

Table 7: Coca cultivation in the Pacific Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)

Department 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

%Change2004-2005

Nario 3,959 9,343 7,494 15,131 17,628 14,154 13,875 -2%Cauca 6,291 4,576 3,139 2,120 1,443 1,266 2,705 114%Choc 250 354 453 323 1,025 219%Valle delCauca

76 184 111 37 45 28 -33%

Total 10,250 14,245 11,171 17,362 19,561 15,788 17,633

Annual trend 39% -22% 55% 13% -19% 12%

Nario is located in the south-western part of the country, at the border with Ecuador. Thegeographic features of the region include high altitudes, as well as coastline and contributed to the

spread of cultivation of coca bush and opium poppy, as well as the maritime smuggling of illegaldrugs and precursors through the department.

Coca cultivation in Nario became significant in 2002, at a time when coca cultivation decreased inthe neighbouring departments of Putumayo and Caqueta. Between 2001 and 2002, cocacultivation decreased by 40,000 hectares in Caqueta and Putumayo, while increasing by 7,600hectares in Nario. Aerial spraying has been intense in Nario department since 2000, exceeding30,000 hectares in 2003 and 2004, and reaching a record 57,630 hectares in 2005.

In 2005, coca cultivation was found in 24 municipalities out of 64. With a total of 13,875 hectares ofcoca cultivation, Nario has the second highest amount of land under illicit cultivation and 16% ofthe total coca cultivation in the country. It is worth noting that Nario accounted for 51% of all the

fields of less than hectares found in the country, which is an indication of the coca cultivationpractices in Nario.

Like neighbouring Nario department,Cauca has a long coastline, highmountain ranges and a mainly ruraleconomy, but coca cultivationremained relatively low in Caucadepartment. However, following aperiod of continuous decrease

between 1999 and 2004, cocacultivation increased between 2004and 2005 by 1,420 hectares (+114%),despite aerial spraying which for thefirst time exceeded 3,000 hectares.Several alternative developmentprojects have been implemented inCauca, the first one starting in 1985.

Coca seed beds in Choco department

Although its capital, Cali, was an important centre for narco-trafficking in the nineties, thedepartment of Valle del Cauca always recorded less than 200 hectares under coca cultivation.


25/118

Caribbean Sea

RoM

eta

Ro

Cauca

RoAtrato

RoM

ag

dalen

a

anJuan

Catatumbo

RoC

atatumbo

Sur de BolvarNorte de Antioquia

Valle

Tolima

Sucre

Santander

Risaralda

Norte de Santander

Meta

La Guajira

Huila

Cundinamarca

Crdoba

Choc

Cesar

Cauca

Casanare

Bolvar

Atlntico

Arauca

Antioquia

Cartagena

Sincelejo

Bucaramanga

Montera

Manizales

Ibagu

Quibd

Yopal

Cucut

Valledupar

Santa Marta

Villavicencio

Medelln

Barranquilla

Bogot

76W

76W 74W

74W

72W

4N

4N

6N

6N

8N

8N

10N

10N

COLOMBIA

PANAM

A

VENEZUELA

PERU

ECUADORBRAZIL


Coca cultivation density in the Central region, Colombia 2005

0 200km

100

VENEZUELA




Central Region

RoadsGeographic coordinates WGS 84

Caldas

Magdalena

Boyac

> 8

0.1 - 1.0

1.1 - 2.0

2.1 - 4.0

4.1 - 8.0


26/118


25

2.1.1.4 Central region

Table 8: Coca cultivation in the Central Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)


Antioquia 3,644 2,547 3,171 3,030 4,273 5,168 6,414 25%Bolivar 5,897 5,960 4,824 2,735 4,470 3,402 3,670 8%Cordoba 1,920 117 652 385 838 1,536 3,136 101%Santander - 2,826 415 463 632 1,124 981 -13%Norte Santander 15,039 6,280 9,145 8,041 4,471 3,055 844 -72%Boyac - 322 245 118 594 359 342 -5%Caldas - - - - 54 358 189 -47%Cundinamarca - 66 22 57 57 71 56 -15%Total 26,500 18,118 18,474 14,829 15,389 15,073 15,632Annual trend -32% 2% -20% 4% -2% 4%

Since 2002, coca cultivation remained stable at around 15,000 hectares in the Central region ofColombia. Between 2004 and 2005, coca cultivation increased by 4% to reach 15,632 hectares. Atthe end of the nineties, Norte de Santander department was one of the most important centres ofcoca cultivation in the country, accounting for 10% of the country total in 1999. Between 2002 and2004, aerial spraying averaged 10,000 hectares per year over this area, but in 2005 dropped toless than 1,000 hectares. At the same time, important alternative development projects have beenimplemented. Consequently, between 1999 and 2005, the Government has been able to reducedrastically coca cultivation in this department. In 2005, coca cultivation accounted for only 850hectares, or only 6% of the level of coca cultivation in 1999.

In the department of Bolivar, coca cultivation is concentrated in the south, in an area known as Surde Bolivar. Coca cultivation in the department remained relatively stable, accounting between 4%

and 8% of the country total between 1999 and 2005. This relative low level of coca cultivation inthe area might be attributed to a combination of aerial spraying and implementation of alternativedevelopment projects.

Forest logging and establishment of new coca fields in mountain areas, Antioquia and Bolivar department

In Antioquia, coca cultivation averaged 3,000 hectares between 1999 and 2002. Coca cultivationhas been increasing since 2002, from 3,030 hectares to 6,410 hectares in 2005. This increase overthe past three years occurred despite the intensification of aerial spraying, from 3,300 hectares in2002 to 11,000 hectares in 2004 and 16,800 hectares in 2005.

In the department of Caldas, the most important coffee growing area in Colombia, 54 hectares ofcoca cultivation were detected for the first time in 2003. Coca cultivation reached a peak in 2004with 358 hectares, but decreased to 190 hectares in 2005.


27/118

RoM

eta

Ro M

agdalen

a

RoGuaviare

RoPutu

mayo

RoCaquet

RoAm

azonas

Ro Inrida

Ro Cag

un

RoVaups

Vaups

ValleTolima

Putumayo

Nario

Meta

Huila

Guaviare

Cundinamarca

Choc

Cauca

CasanareCaldas

Boyac

Amazonas

Solano

SantiagoCurillo

Coln

Valparaiso Miln

AlbaniaSan

Francisco

Cartagena del Chaira

Mocoa

Morelia

San Jos dela Fragua

Florencia

La Montaita

El Paujil

El Doncello

PuertoRico

San Vicentedel Cagun

San Miguel

Valle delGuamuz

Puerto Ass PuertoLeguizamo

PuertoCaicedoOrito

Solita

PuertoGuzmn

Villa Garzn

Neiva

Manizales

Ibagu

Mocoa

Yopal

Miraflores

Puerto Ass

Popayn

Pasto

Cali

Florencia

Villavicencio

Bogot

San Jos

76W

76W 74W

74W

72W

72W

2S

2S

0

0

2N

2N

4N

4N

COLOMBIA

PANAMA

VENEZUELA

PERU

ECUADORBRAZIL


Coca cultivation density in the Putumayo-Caqueta region, Colombia 2005

0 200km

100

PERU

ECUADOR


Caquet




Putumayo Caquet Region

Roads

Municipality boundaries

> 8

0.1 - 1.0

1.1 - 2.0

2.1 - 4.0

4.1 - 8.0


28/118


27

2.1.1.5 Putumayo-Caqueta region

Table 9: Coca cultivation in the Putumayo-Caqueta Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)


Caquet 23,718 26,603 14,516 8,412 7,230 6,500 4,988 -23%Putumayo 58,297 66,022 47,120 13,725 7,559 4,386 8,963 105%Total 82,015 92,625 61,636 22,137 14,789 10,886 13,951

Annualtrend

13% -33% -64% -33% -26% 28%

In 2000, coca cultivation peaked in Putumayo department at 66,000 hectares, representing 40% ofthe national total. Following four years of consecutive decreases, coca cultivation in Putumayo wasestimated at 4,400 hectares or 5% of the national total in 2004, but this trend was reversed andbetween 2004 and 2005 coca cultivation soared by 105% in this department. At the same time,aerial spraying decreased from 17,500 hectares in 2004 to 11,800 hectares in 2005, while therewere few new alternative development activities in 2005.

Most of the new coca fields were established on the foot hills close to the border with Caucadepartment. Spraying is particularly difficult in these mountainous areas, which could be a reasonfor the migration of coca cultivation to this region.

In a belt of about 10 km wide along the Ecuadorian border that cover about 550,000 hectares, inthe departments of Nario and Putumayo, almost 4,000 hectares of coca cultivation were found in2005. This represented an increase of 1,000 hectares (or 32%) compared to the same area in2004.

In Caqueta department, coca cultivation peaked at 26,000 hectares in 2000 or 16% of the countrytotal. Following intense aerial spraying that started in 1996 with 537 hectares and peaked in 2002at 18,600 hectares, coca cultivation decreased. In 2005, coca cultivation was at its lowest level at4,990 hectares, or 6% of the country total.

Coca fields in Putumayo department


29/118

RoM

eta

Ro Vicha

da

RoGuaviare

RoArauca

RoInr

ida

RoTom

o

Ro

Or

ino

co

Vichada

Vaups

Meta

Guaviare

Guaina

Casanare

Arauca

SantaRosala

Cumaribo

La Primavera

PuertoCarreno

PuertoRondn

Tame

CravoNorte

Fortul Arauquita

Saravena

Arauca

Puerto Inrida

Cucut

Arauca

Puerto Carreo

72W

72W

70W

70W

68W

68W

2N

2N

4N

4N

6N 6

N

8N 8

N

COLOMBIA

PANAM

A

VENEZUELA

PERU

ECUADORBRAZIL


Coca cultivation density in the Orinoco region, Colombia 2005

0 200km

100

VENEZUELA



Department boundariesInternational boundaries

Orinoco Region

Roads

Municipality boundaries

BRAZIL

> 8

0.1 - 1.0

1.1 - 2.0

2.1 - 4.0

4.1 - 8.0


30/118


29

2.1.1.6 Orinoco region

Table 10: Coca cultivation in the Orinoco Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)


Vichada - 4,935 9,166 4,910 3,818 4,692 7,826 67%Arauca - 978 2,749 2,214 539 1,552 1,883 21%Total - 5,913 11,915 7,124 4,357 6,244 9,709 -Annualtrend

- - 102% -40% -39% 43% 56% -

In Vichada department, near the Venezuelan border, coca cultivation peaked at 9,200 hectares in2001. It remained between 4,000 and 5,000 hectares from 2002 to 2004, but increased by 67%between 2004 and 2005 to reach 7,830 hectares. This increase was the second largest in the2004-2005 period.

In Vichada, the most important concentration of coca cultivation can be found along the Uva river.However, in the past three years, coca cultivation tended to expand to the Eastern part of thedepartment, towards the Venezuelan border. The dispersion of coca cultivation in remote parts ofthe department increases the time flight and cost of aerial spraying. As a result, aerial spraying hasalways been relatively low in this department (below 3,000 hectares), and for 2005, no aerialspraying was reported.

Coca cultivation in Arauca was detected for the first time in 2000 with about 1,000 hectares. It wentover 2,000 hectares in 2001 and 2002. In 2003, aerial spraying amounted to 12,000 hectares andcoca cultivation dropped to 500 hectares in December of that year. However, it increased again in2004 and 2005 to reach 1,883 hectares.

Coca fields in Arauca department interspersed with licit crops


31/118

Ro

Meta

Ro Vicha

da

RoGuaviare

RoPutumayo

RoCaquet

RoArauca

Ro C

agu

n

RoInr

ida

RoVaups

RoIgaraParana

RoAp

aporis

RoAmazonas

RoOri

noco

Vichada

Vaups

Santander

Meta

Guaviare

Guaina

Cundinamarca

Casanare

Caquet

Boyac

Arauca

Amazonas

PuertoNario

Leticia

Tarapaca

ElEncanto

PuertoArica

PuertoAlegra

LaPedrera

LaChorrera

Yavarate

LaGuadalupeCarur Mit

Papunahua

Pana Pana

SanFelipe

MorichalNuevo

PuertoColombia

Barranco Mina

CacahualInirida

PuertoSantander

Taraira

MiritParan

LaVictoria

Pacoa

Puerto Inrida

Yopal

Miraflores

Bogot

San Jos

Mit

Leticia

PuertoCarreo

74W

74W

72W

72W

70W

70W

68W

68W

4S

4S

2S

2S

0

0

2N

2N

4N

4N

6N

6N

COLOMBIA

PANAM

A

VENEZUELA

PERU

ECUADOR

BRAZIL


Coca cultivation density in the Amazonia region, Colombia 2005

0 200km

100

VENEZUELA

PERU

BRAZIL


Department boundariesInternational boundaries

Amazon Region

RoadsMunicipality boundaries


> 8

0.1 - 1.0

1.1 - 2.0

2.1 - 4.0

4.1 - 8.0


32/118


31

2.1.1.7 Amazonia region

Table 11: Coca cultivation in the Amazonia Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)


Vaups 1,014 1,493 1,918 1,485 1,157 1,084 671 -38% Amazonas - - 532 784 625 783897 15%Guaina - 853 1,318 749 726 721 752 5%Total 1,014 2,346 3,768 3,018 2,508 2,588 2,320 Annual trend - - 61% -20% -17% 3%-10%

Like Putumayo-Caqueta region, the departments of Vaups, Amazonas and Guaina belong to the Amazon basin. Although sharing important similarity with Putumayo and Caqueta, these threedepartments, refer to as Amazon region, have never been important centres of coca cultivation.This is due to the remoteness of the area, lack of airport and road infrastructure linking this regionto the rest of the country. Consequently, aerial spraying of coca cultivation was almost not existent,except in Vaups.

Coca cultivation remained relatively stable in the region, at around 3,000 hectares, since cocacultivation was first observed in 2000.

Coca field surrounded by forest areas in the Amazon region


33/118

Sea

RoMa

gdalena

R

oCa

tatum

bo

Sierra Nevadade Santa Marta

Sucre

Santander

Norte de Santander

Magdalena

La Guajira

Cesar

Bolvar

Antioquia

Valledupar

Riohacha

Santa Marta

Cucut

74W

74W

73W

73W

72W

72W

8N

8N

9N

9N

10N

10N

11N

11N

12N

12N

13N

13N

COLOMBIA

PANAMA

VENEZUELA

PERU

ECUADORBRAZIL


Coca cultivation density in the Sierra Nevada region, Colombia 2005

0 100km

Caribbean Sea

VENEZUELA

Gulf ofMaracaibo

50




Sierra Nevada Region

RoadsGeographic coordinates WGS 84

> 8

0.1 - 1.0

1.1 - 2.0

2.1 - 4.0

4.1 - 8.0


34/118


33

2.1.1.8 Sierra Nevada region

Table 12: Coca cultivation in the Sierra Nevada region, Colombia, 1999 2005


Magdalena 521 200 480 644 484 706 213 -70%Guajira - 321 385 354 275 556 329 -41%Total 521 521 865 998 759 1,262 542Annual trend - 0% 66% 15% -24% 66% -57%

The Sierra Nevada region, with the departments of Magdalena and Guajira, has never been animportant centre of coca cultivation in Colombia. Coca cultivation remained between 500 and 1,300hectares over the last seven years. Between 2004 and 2005, coca cultivation decreased by animpressive 57%, to reach one of its lowest level with only 540 hectares. Coca cultivation remainedlocated mainly in the fringe of lowlands between the high mountains of the Sierra Nevada and thesea shore.

However, the region is an important area for narco-trafficking activities, in particular for theshipping of drugs to the Caribbean Islands and the United States.

For a few years already, the Sierra Nevada region benefited from important aid for alternativedevelopment, mainly due to the existence Sierra Nevada National Park. Governments dataindicated an important increase in alternative development budget for 2005. At the same time,aerial spraying activities dropped from around 2,000 hectares in 2004 to 1,000 hectares in 2005.

The region is also an important tourist centre and hosts the Sierra Nevada National Park. TheNational Park is one of the most important ecological reserves in Latin America, known for its richbio-diversity and presence of several ancient indigenous cultures. In 2005, coca cultivation

amounted to 95 hectares in the Sierra Nevada National Park, a decrease of 55% compared to2004.

Coca fields in Sierra Nevada regionSource: Organizacin Gonawidua Tayrona


35/118


34

Coca fields in the Sierra Nevada region

Coca fields in the Sierra Nevada region


36/118


35

2.1.1.9 Possible areas of new cultivation

The survey covered and interpreted 100% of the national territory, including areas previously notknown as being coca growing regions. In doing so it serves as an early warning system to detectand prevent the spread of coca into new areas.

Potential small coca fields have been detected in remote areas outside the established agriculturalareas of the departments of the Orinoco and Amazon river basins. Field verification has not beencarried out in theses areas because it was considered too time consuming and too costly to verifysmall and isolated patches of coca cultivation. Because of the absence of field verification, theestimate for coca cultivation in these areas are presented as indicative and not included in the finalestimate. The 2005 survey 15 LandSat images analysed for vegetation having similarcharacteristics as coca fields. A total of 276 hectares were assessed as possible coca cultivation innew area.

Table 13: Possible coca cultivation in new areas in 2005

Department hectares

Amazonas 116Vichada 79

Vaups 77Meta 4

Total 276

New coca fields in Choco


37/118


38/118


39/118


38

Variety: Erythroxylum coca Lam. Var. ipadu Plowman

This variety represented 21% of the sample. The most common names attributedby the farmers to this variety have been Dulce and Amarga. Both fall in therank of morphologic variation described for the variety. It differs from the varietycoca by the rounded end of leaf.

This variety is confined to the Amazonia region, between 100 and 500 metersabove sea level.

Erythroxylum coca Lam. Var. ipaduPlowman

Species: Erythroxylum coca novogranatense (Morris) Hierron.

Variety: Erythroxylum coca novogranatense (Morris) Hierron. Var. novogranatense

This variety represented 20 % of the sample. The most common names attributedby farmers to this variety were Pajarito and Caucana. This bush of up to sixmeters is taller than the other species. The leaves are more oblong and elongatedthan for the species Erythroxylum coca. The pedicels are about 4 to 12 mm long,and the fruits of about 8 to 13 mm long.

This variety is frequently found in mountainous areas and is the most common inthe Sierra Nevada region and occasionally in Arauca.

Erythroxylum coca novogranatense (Morris) Hierron. Var. novogranatense


40/118


39

Samples of the different varieties of coca leaves collected for the taxonomical identification

Erythroxylum coca Lam. var. coca Erythroxylum coca Lam. Var. ipadu

Erythroxylum coca novogranatense Var. novogranatense


41/118

Pacific

Ocean

Caribbean Sea

RoM

a

gdalena

RoM

eta

Ro Vichad

a

Ro

Cauca

RoM

agdale

na

Ro G

uaviare

RoPutuma

yo

RoCaquet

RoArauca

Ro

Atrato

PANAM

A

RoA

mazonas

Ro I

nrida

R

oO

rinoco

Vichada

Vaups

Valle

Tolima

Sucre

Santander

Risaralda

Quindo

Putumayo

Norte deSantander

Nario

Meta

Magdalena

La Guajira

Huila

GuaviareGuaina

Cundinamarca

Crdoba

Choc

Cesar

Cauca

Casanare

Caquet

Caldas

Boyac

Bolvar

Atlntico

Arauca

Antioquia

Amazonas

VENEZUELA

PERU

ECUADOR

BRAZIL

Neiva

Puerto Ass

Tumaco

Popayn

Cucut

Cartagena

Pasto

Cali

Florencia

Medelln

Barranquilla

Bogot

SanJos

Mit

Leticia

Arauca

PuertoCarreo

75W

75W 70W

70W5S

5S

0

0

5N

5N

10N

10N

South America

In Colombia the ICV index is 77 points out of 100. The Regions at the bottom of the index have the worst conditions in terms of life quality.The Pacific Region doesn't meet the required index level in education, public services and housing.Sources: for coca cultivation Government of Colombia, National monitoring system supported by UNODC; for poverty indicators UNDP and DNPThe boundaries and names shown and the designations used in this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations

Index of livelihood conditions* by department in 2003 and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005

Colombia



Index of livelihood conditions*by department as of 2003

Coca cultivation 2005

55 - 70 %

70 - 80 %

80 - 100 %


1500 300km

No data


42/118


41

2.1.1.11 Coca cultivation and poverty

The illicit crops problem in Colombia is the result of a number of factors which have created afertile ground for coca cultivation to proliferate. In cases where coca is planted as a result of choiceand not coercion, poverty is one of the main causes together with a lack of respect for laws. Inmost cases, the emergence of illicit crops does not significantly increase peasants income, butcan improve their basic subsistence when other income generating activities are not present. Cocafarmers are far from being the main beneficiary from the huge profits generated by the illicitbusiness.

According to the MRPD4 of the National Department of Planning, poverty rate for Colombia in 2005were estimated at 49.2% for poverty and 14.7% for extreme poverty. Rural poverty went up from67.5% in 2004 to 68.2% in 2005, and in terms of the population size, the number of poor people inrural areas went up from 7.89 to 8.02 million persons. As for extreme poverty, the indicatorsshowed a stable situation between 2004 and 2005 (27.6% in 2004 and 27.5% en 2005), and interms of population size, about 3.23 millions persons were estimated living in extreme poverty.

Table 14: Estimated poverty and extreme poverty 2001 2005

Year Country Urban area Rural area

2002 57,0 50,2 75,1

2003 50,7 46,3 62,9

2004 52,7 47,3 67,5Poverty

2005 49,2 42,3 68,2

2002 20,7 15,5 34,9

2003 15,8 12,6 24,6

2004 17,4 13,7 27,6

Extremepoverty

2005 14,7 10,2 27,5Source: MRPD of PND

Some areas where coca cultivation is present show a lower level socio-economic development.Most of the population living in poor conditions is concentrated in the rural area.

In Colombia, the GDP for the agricultural showed a decrease from 14.42% in 2000 to 13.53% in2004 of the total GDP at constant price of 1994. The GDP of the agricultural sector showed one ofthe lowest increase rate compared to other sectors. This indicated a loss of the terms of exchangeof the agricultural sector. The situation worsened in the 1990s following the disappearance of theprotection instruments like aid or subsidies.

However if Colombian poverty indicators are compared with those of other Andean Countries, theargument of a strong linkage between poverty of livelihoods and cocaine production seems weak.In fact, if poverty were to boost coca cultivation, largest coca crops should move to poorest Andeancountries, which is not the case.

4 Misin para la Reduccin de la Pobreza y la Desigualdad


43/118


44/118


43

331.234374.856

424.075

220.111

161.921131.716

-

50.000

100.000

150.000

200.000

250.000

300.000

350.000

400.000

450.000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

pe

opledisplaced

-

20.000

40.000

60.000

80.000

100.000

120.000

140.000

160.000

180.000

hectare

People displaced Coca cultivation

2.1.1.12 Coca cultivation and displacement

Violence, armed conflict, drug trafficking and the search for better living conditions have generatedenormous displacement of persons over the past two decades. Significant differences in thenumber of internally displaced persons (IDPs) are recorded by different sources. The problem isknown to be important and has produced a real humanitarian crisis for the country.

In Colombia, the Social Solidarity Net, known as RSS, maintains a registry at the municipality levelof people who had to leave a municipality because of violence during the year. Data is indicative,as it is very difficult to track people move and motivation for move. RSS revised its previousestimates, but the trend remains the same. However, no statistically significant correlation has sofar been established at the department level between number of IDPs and coca cultivation.

Figure 4. Number of IDP and coca cultivation, 2000 2005

Source: RSS 2001 to 2004 data revised in 2005


45/118


46/118


45

2.1.1.13 Coca cultivation and the forest warden families programme

UNODC is presently carrying out the monitoring the Governments Forest Warden FamiliesProgramme. The main objective of the Forest Warden Families Programme is to motivatefarmers to keep their land free of illicit crops. The programme also aims at the recovery of theforest in areas that are ecologically and socially vulnerable. The government and the families signa contract with payments of a monthly salary (US$ 265) per family for a three years period. Themap shows the geographic location of the 50 ongoing projects.

The Forest Warden Families Programme has three main components: environmental, by thepreservation of the environment with technical support of expert entities in the training of familiesfor the establishment of productive and sustainable projects. The second component deals with theincrease of the social capital, by a permanent training of families in community savings, leadership,project managements among others. The economic component consists in a temporary financialaid to the beneficiary families.

The selection criteria for the areas of each project is based on the identification of a number ofdistricts within one or two municipalities that constitute a geographic unit along with the

commitment of the inhabitants to keep all farms of his own district free of illicit crops. A break ofthis commitment from just one family in a given district implies the withdrawal of all families of thatdistrict from the project. However, in practice, this criterion has been replaced by the considerationof lists of families willing to enter in the agreement.

The role of SIMCI II to provide support to UNODC in this endeavour has consisted mainly in thedelivery of thematic cartography and technical support in multitemporal analysis of vegetation landcovers as well as the verification of presence or absence of coca crops in the districts using remotesensing tools.

Forest warden families programme


47/118


48/118


47

2.1.1.14 Coca cultivation in National Parks

The presence of illicit crops in both Natural Parks and Indigenous Territories has been monitoredby SIMCI since the 2001 survey, and the data have been delivered to the competent authorities toenable them to identify actions and projects to be applied for the preservation of its social andenvironmental characteristics with minimum of harm.

The limits of National Parks and Indian territories have been provided by the official entities incharge of their management. In 2005, the limits of National Parks were edited by the monitoringproject in cooperation with technicians from the National Parks Administrative Unit. The editingimproved the match between SIMCI cartographic material and the official boundaries of the Parks.National Parks boundaries are not always precise and therefore coca cultivation estimated in eachof them depends on the accuracy of their delimitation. To enable annual comparison the sameboundaries were used for each year.

Coca cultivation in 2005 was found in 12 of the 51 National Parks in Colombia, them. With 6,100hectares in 2005, coca cultivation represented 0.05% of the total area covered by National Parks,and coca cultivation in National Parks represented 7% of the total level of coca cultivation in 2005.

Overall, coca cultivation in National Parks increased by 14% between 2004 and 2005. Thisincrease was mainly due to an increase in the National Parks of Sierra La Macarena (+647hectares, or +24%), La Paya (+498 hectares or 217%) and Paramillo (+225 hectares or +49%). Inmost other National Parks, coca cultivation decreased, and almost completely disappeared fromthe National Parks of Sanquianga, Farallones and Tayrona.

The detailed results by indigenous territories are presented in annexes.

Table 15: Coca cultivation in National Parks in Colombia, 2003 2005 (hectares)

National Parks2003

(hectares)2004

(hectares)2005

(hectares)% Change2004-2005

Sierra La Macarena 1,152 2,707 3,354 24%Nukak 1,469 1,043 930 -11%La Paya 310 230 728 217%Paramillo 110 461 686 49%Tinigua 340 387 155 -60%Sierra Nevada 212 241 95 -61%Puinawai 33 139 60 -57%Catatumbo-Bari 129 107 55 -49% Alto Fragua 8 14 25 79%

Munchique 1 8 13 63%Los Picachos 13 15 7 -53%Yarigues - - 2 -Sanquianga 7 - - -Farallones 2 - - -Tayrona 4 1 - -Total 3,790 5,353 6,110

Rounded total 3,800 5,400 6,100 14%

SIMCI and the National Parks Administrative Unit published at the end of 2005 a Multitemporal Analysis about the impact of coca crops in National Parks in the period 2001-2005. On this

occasion, the borders of the Parks were edited which produced slight adjustments in the cocacultivation estimates within these parks.


49/118


48

Colombian National Parks affected by coca cultivation

Indigenous community in the National Park Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta

National Park Puinawai affected by licit crops


50/118


51/118


50

2.1.2 REPORTED OPIUM POPPY CULTIVATION

Opium poppy cultivation was introduced in Colombia in the 1980s, in a few marginal agriculturalzones, when coffee prices fell down. The farmers cultivated opium poppy at an altitude rangingbetween 1,700 to 3,000 meters, in small fields, interspersed with licit crops.

Opium poppy is now mainly being cultivated on mountain sides in south-western Colombia,especially in the departments of Huila, Tolima, Cauca and Nario, and in minor quantities in Cesarand Guajira.

UNODC so-far has not monitored the extent of opium poppy cultivation in Colombia. Accordingto Colombian Government figures, the total area under opium poppy cultivation as of December2005, amounted to 2,000 hectares with a reduction of 50% compared to last year estimate of 4,000hectares. Opium poppy cultivation in Colombia represented only 1% of the world opium poppycultivation in 2005.

Table 16: Opium poppy cultivation in Colombia, 2002 2005 (in hectares)

Department 2002 2003 2004 2005% Change2004-2005

% 2005total

Cauca 1,155 600 450 538 20% 28%Nario 1,230 540 460 475 3% 24%Huila 624 636 1,135 320 -72% 16%Tolima 682 1,359 1,090 265 -76% 14%Cesar 454 651 675 152 -77% 8%Caqueta - - 105 132 26% 7%Guajira - 240 35 68 94% 3%Caldas

8 - - - 0%Total 4,153 4,026 3,950 1,950 -51% 100%Rounded total 4,200 4,000 4,000 2,000 -50%

Source: DIRAN

Figur

01576-colombia coca survey 2005 eng

Documents