Government of Colombia

Colombia
Coca Cultivation Survey

June 2006

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Abbreviations CICAD COP DANE DEA DIRAN DNE DNP ICMP INCB IDB IDP PDA PCI RSS SIMCI II UIAF UNODC US$ Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission Colombian Pesos National Department of Statistics US Drugs Enforcement Agency Colombian Anti-Narcotics Police National Narcotics Office National Planning Department Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme International Narcotics Control Board Inter-American Development Bank Internally Displaced People Alternative Development Programme Presidential Programme against Illicit Crops Colombian Social Solidarity Net Integrated Illicit Crops Monitoring System Special Administrative Unit on Information and Financial Analysis United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. United States Dollars

Acknowledgements The following organizations and individuals contributed to the implementation of the 2005 coca cultivation survey in Colombia, and to the preparation of the present report: Government of Colombia: Ministry of Interior and Justice National Narcotics Office -DNE Colombian Anti-Narcotics Police -DIRAN Ministry of Defence Colombia Agency for International Cooperation –ACCI Presidential Agency for Social Action and International Cooperation UNODC: Rodolfo Llinás, SIMCI Project Coordinator Orlando González, Digital Processing Expert Sandra Rodríguez, Digital Processing Expert Zully Sosa, Digital Processing Expert Maria Isabel Velandia, Digital Processing Expert Martha Paredes, Research and Analysis Expert Leonardo Correa, Field Engineer Juan Carlos Parra, Editing Engineer Martha Luz Gutierrez, Administrative Assistant Javier Espejo, Assistant Engineer Juan Pablo Ardila, Assistant Engineer Sandro Calvani, Representative for Colombia Guillermo 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 UNODC’s Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme in the Andean countries and the Colombia survey in 2005 was made possible thanks to financial contributions from the Governments of The United States of America (USAID), The Netherlands and United Kingdom.

2

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

PREFACE

The world’s appetite for cocaine remains stable but uneven, declining in the United States while increasing in Europe. In 2005 more than two thirds of the supply came from Colombia (640 tons), where coca cultivation increased 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 Colombia remains almost 50% below the peak recorded in 2000. Furthermore, country-wide aerial eradication has become more difficult due to a growingly aggressive insurgency fuelled by the narco-economy (and vice versa). A further factor affected this Colombia coca crop survey for 2005: the need for UNODC – in co-operation with 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 into account this new evidence. These higher figures for the cocaine yield in Colombia suggest that there is more cocaine on the international market than previously believed. This may help explain why the price for cocaine has not gone up and the purity of doses has not declined on the streets of consuming nations, despite the halving in cultivation since 2000, the massive number of labs destroyed (1,953 in Colombia alone in 2005), and the dramatic (and still under-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 have participated 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 more challenging 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 to international borders. The overriding strategy of putting an end to coca cultivation through eradication must be pursued relentlessly. However, there should be a change in tactics using finer and more sustainable instruments. In particular, the second strong popular mandate received by President Uribe should make it possible for his new 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) to internally displaced people. In Colombia, like in other countries, poverty in the countryside and lack of government 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 farmers need 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 government’s zero-coca policies, and increase the chances of long-term success. The international community must share the responsibility for reducing the world’s 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 Costa Executive Director United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 3

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

TABLE OF CONTENT
1 2 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................... 8 FINDINGS.............................................................................................................................................................. 10 2.1 CULTIVATION ................................................................................................................................................. 10 2.1.1 Coca Cultivation ....................................................................................................................................... 10
2.1.1.1 2.1.1.2 2.1.1.3 2.1.1.4 2.1.1.5 2.1.1.6 2.1.1.7 2.1.1.8 2.1.1.9 2.1.1.10 2.1.1.11 2.1.1.12 2.1.1.13 2.1.1.14 Regional analysis ...............................................................................................................................................................19 Meta-Guaviare region ........................................................................................................................................................21 Pacific region.....................................................................................................................................................................23 Central region ....................................................................................................................................................................25 Putumayo-Caqueta region..................................................................................................................................................27 Orinoco region...................................................................................................................................................................29 Amazonia region................................................................................................................................................................31 Sierra Nevada region .........................................................................................................................................................33 Possible areas of new cultivation .......................................................................................................................................35 Coca plant varieties............................................................................................................................................................37 Coca cultivation and poverty .............................................................................................................................................41 Coca cultivation and displacement ....................................................................................................................................43 Coca cultivation and the forest warden families programme .............................................................................................45 Coca cultivation in National Parks.....................................................................................................................................47

2.1.2 2.2 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5 2.3 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.4 2.5 3

Reported Opium Poppy Cultivation.......................................................................................................... 50 NEW FINDINGS ON YIELD AND PRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 53 Coca leaf yield and coca leaf production ................................................................................................. 53 Annual yield .............................................................................................................................................. 55 Coca leaf, coca paste and base production .............................................................................................. 63 Revised Potential Cocaine production...................................................................................................... 68 Opium latex and heroin production .......................................................................................................... 70 PRICES ............................................................................................................................................................ 71 Coca leaf, coca base and cocaine prices .................................................................................................. 71 Opium latex and heroin prices.................................................................................................................. 76 REPORTED AERIAL SPRAYING AND MANUAL ERADICATION .......................................................................... 78 REPORTED SEIZURE ........................................................................................................................................ 83

METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................................ 89 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 COCA CULTIVATION ....................................................................................................................................... 89 OPIUM POPPY CULTIVATION ........................................................................................................................... 99 YIELD AND PRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................. 100 PRICES .......................................................................................................................................................... 110

4

ANNEX ................................................................................................................................................................. 111

4

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Index of Maps
Map 1: Map 2: Map 3: Map 4: Map 5: Map 6: Map 7: Map 8: Map 9: Map 10: Map 11: Map 12: Map 13: Map 14: Map 15: Map 16: Map 17: Map 18: Map 19: Map 20: Map 21: Map 22: Map 23: Map 24: Map 25: Map 26: Map 27: Map 28: Coca cultivation density in Colombia, 2005.................................................................................................... 9 Coca cultivation density change in Colombia, 2004-2005 ............................................................................ 12 Coca cultivation density in Colombia, 2004.................................................................................................. 14 Coca cultivation density in Colombia, 2005.................................................................................................. 14 Changes in coca cultivation in Colombia, 2001- 2005 .................................................................................. 15 Coca cultivation density in the Andean region, 2005 .................................................................................... 16 Coca cultivation by region in Colombia, 2001-2005..................................................................................... 18 Coca cultivation density in the Meta-Guaviare region, Colombia 2005........................................................ 20 Coca cultivation density in the Pacific region, Colombia 2005..................................................................... 22 Coca cultivation density in the Central region, Colombia 2005 .................................................................... 24 Coca cultivation density in the Putumayo-Caqueta region, Colombia 2005 ................................................. 26 Coca cultivation density in the Orinoco region, Colombia 2005................................................................... 28 Coca cultivation density in the Amazonia region, Colombia 2005 ............................................................... 30 Coca cultivation density in the Sierra Nevada region, Colombia 2005 ......................................................... 32 Distribution of coca plants varieties in Colombia, 2005................................................................................ 36 Index of livelihood conditions by department in 2003 and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005................... 40 Internal people displaced because of violence between 2000 and 2005 ........................................................ 42 Forest Warden Families Programme and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005.............................................. 44 National Parks and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005................................................................................ 46 Aerial perspective of the National Park Sierra de La Macarena and coca cultivation in 2005 ...................... 49 Coca yield by region in Colombia, 2005 ...................................................................................................... 52 Annual coca leaf production in Colombia, 2005 ........................................................................................... 62 Aerial spraying and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005............................................................................... 80 Destruction of clandestine laboratories and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005 .......................................... 85 Drug seizures by department and by drug type, Colombia 2005................................................................... 87 Satellite images used for the Colombian coca cultivation survey 2005......................................................... 91 Study area distributed by region and Colombia coca cultivation, 2005........................................................ 95 Sample selection for yield survey by regions in Colombia, 2005................................................................ 101

5

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

SUMMARY FACTS SHEET

2004 Net coca cultivation (rounded total) Of which Meta-Guaviare region Pacific region Central region Putumayo-Caqueta region Elsewhere Reported accumulated aerial spraying of coca bush Reported manual eradication of coca bush 80,000 hectares 28,500 hectares 15,800 hectares 15,100 hectares 10,900 hectares 10,100 hectares 136,550 hectares

Variation + 8% - 9% + 12% + 4% +28% +24% +2%

2005 86,000 hectares 25,970 hectares 17,650 hectares 15,630 hectares 13,950 hectares 12,570 hectares 138,775 hectares

2,589 hectares US$ 810 /kg Average farm-gate price of coca paste COP 2,119,000 /kg Total farm-gate value of the production of coca leaf and derivatives in percent of GDP (US$ 122 billion in 2005) in percent of GDP of agricultural sector (US$ 13.8 billion in 2005) Number of households involved in coca cultivation Annual household gross income from the production of coca leaf and its derivatives Annual use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides on coca fields Potential production of cocaine In percent of world cocaine production 6401 mt

31,285 hectares + 12 % US$ 910 /kg - 0.5% COP 2,109,000 /kg US$ 843 million 0.7% 6% 68,600 households US$ 12,300 ~85,000 mt ~12 million litters 640mt + 9% - 6% - 51% - 50% - 50% + 40% + 19% + 16% - 4% + 5% 70 % US$ 1,860/kg COP 4,315,000/kg 1,950 hectares 59 mt 2.5 mt US$ 230 /kg US$ 9,050/kg 173,265 kg 745 kg 1,953

68 % US$ 1,713 /kg Average cocaine price COP 4,600,000 /kg Reported opium poppy cultivation (rounded) 3,950 hectares Potential opium latex production Potential heroin production Average farm-gate price of opium latex Average heroin price Reported seizure of cocaine Reported seizure of heroin Reported destruction of illegal laboratories
2

119 mt 5 mt US$ 164 /kg US$ 7,635 /kg 149,297 kg 773 kg 1,865

Cocaine production for 2004 has been revised following the field findings obtained in 2005. Includes laboratories processing coca paste/base, cocaine hydrochloride, heroin, morphine, potassium, permanganate, and non specified.
2

1

6

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Through its global Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme, UNODC has been assisting the Colombian Government in the implementation and refinement of a national coca monitoring system since 1999. Annual surveys have been produced since then and the present report provides the findings of the coca survey for 2005. The results of the survey showed that, at the end of December 2005, 86,000 hectares of coca were cultivated in 23 out of the 32 Colombian departments. This represents an increase of 6,000 hectares (or + 8%) since 2004 when coca cultivation reached 80,000 hectares. This was the first annual increase recorded after four consecutive annual decreases between 2000 and 2004. The 2005 level of coca cultivation remained however much lower (- 47%) than the peak level of 163,000 hectares recorded in 2000. The most important increase between 2004 and 2005 took place in the region of PutumayoCaqueta (+28%). However, most of coca cultivation continued to take place in the region of MetaGuaviare (30% of the country’s cultivation). In fact, 78% of the 2005 cultivation took place in just seven departments, the same seven departments that also accounted for 78% of 2004 total cultivation: Meta, Nariño, 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 hectares in 2005. This could reflect farmers’ attempts to avoid detection and aerial spraying. Between 2004 and 2005, aerial spraying continued to be intense and was above 130,000 hectares for the fourth consecutive year. In 2005, a total of 138,775 hectares were sprayed. In addition, the government also reported the manual eradication of 31,285 hectares, a record compared to previous levels of 2,600 hectares in 2004 and 4,011 hectares in 2003. The total of both types of eradication (spraying and manual) amounted to 170,060 hectares in 2005. Between May 2005 and February 2006, the Colombian Government jointly with UNODC implemented 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-dried coca leaf). With the information provided by the farmers, the average annual yield per hectare for pure 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-value of US$ 843 million, equivalent to 0.7% of the 2005 GDP and 6% of the GDP of the agricultural sector. It should be noted however that this value does not take into account production costs like herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers and wages. The coca leaf yield survey also enabled to estimate the total number of households involved in coca farming at about 68,600 households. The farm gate 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 in 2005 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 85,000 metric tons of fertilizers and pesticides in their coca fields in 2005, together with about 12 million liters of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides. It was also interesting to note that 129,000 liters of glyphosate and round-up were sprayed by farmers on their coca fields, two herbicides used in the aerial spraying of coca cultivation. However farmers’ concentrations were probably lower than the concentration used for aerial spraying.

7

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

1 INTRODUCTION
The objectives of UNODC’s Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme (ICMP) are to establish methodologies for data collection and analysis, to increase the governments’ capacity to monitor illicit crops on their territories and to assist the international community in monitoring the extent and evolution of illicit crops in the context of the elimination strategy adopted by the Member States at the U.N. General Assembly Special Session on Drugs in June 1998. ICMP presently covers seven countries: Colombia, Bolivia and Peru for coca; Afghanistan, Laos and Myanmar for opium and Morocco for cannabis. During the 1980’s and 1990’s, Colombia became the country with the largest illicit coca growing area and cocaine production in the world. Illicit coca cultivation in the country expanded steadily throughout this period, in particular in remote areas of the Amazon basin. Although, coca cultivation started to decrease in 2001, Colombia still remains the largest coca-growing country in the world. UNODC has supported the monitoring of illicit crops since 1999, and has produced seven annual surveys. 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 has established to facilitate the implementation of additional tasks in the framework of an integrated approach to the analysis of the drug problem in Colombia. The project also supports the monitoring of related problems such as fragile ecosystems, natural parks, indigenous territories, the expansion of the agricultural frontier and deforestation. It provides Geographic Information System support to the government’s alternative development projects and it’s Forest Families Warden Programme. The new project foresees the creation of an Inter-Institutional Committee permanently assigned to the 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 by Ministry of Interior and Justice and the International Cooperation Agency. The national counterpart and 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 research and analysis specialist, two assistant engineers and an administrative assistant. The team is integrated on permanent basis by technicians from DIRAN and National Parks Administration it supports several studies and investigations for government and private institutions, related to land use, environment, licit crops, etc. SIMCI provides to their experts, access to its Spatial Information Data Bank, transfer of technology and guidance to achieve their goals. Organizations that benefited from SIMCI support include DANE, local governments, the National Federation of Coffee Growers, NGO’s as well as other UN agencies and projects.

8

Coca cultivation density in Colombia, 2005
75°W
Colombia

70°W

Caribbean Sea
La Guajira

South America

Barranquilla
Atlántico Magdalena

Cartagena
10°N

Cesar
Río Ma

da

PA NA

lena

Sucre Córdoba Bolívar Norte de Santander

VENEZUELA

Cucutá

Arauca
Río Ca uca

Antioquia

o trat

Santander

Arauca

Puerto
R í o A rauc a Carreño

Río A

Medellín
Boyacá Caldas
oM

e ta

Chocó
5°N

Casanare

Río Orin o

co

Pacific Ocean
Valle

Risaralda Quindío Tolima

Cundinamarca

Vichada
ichada Río V

Bogotá

Cali
na

Meta

G Río

iare uav

ag d a

le

Neiva San José

Cauca Popayán Huila
Tumaco

Río M

oI Rí

a nírid

Guainía

Guaviare Nariño

Florencia Mitú
Caquetá Putumayo Puerto Asís Vaupés

Pasto

Río Ca

quet á

P

ECUADOR

u tu ma

yo

Amazonas

BRAZIL

Cultivation density (ha/km²)
0.1 - 1.0 1.1 - 4.0 > 4.0 International boundaries Department boundaries

PERU

Am a

o

zo n

as

Leticia
0

150
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

300 km

5°S

75°W

70°W

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

5°S


R ío

5°N

10°N

g

A M

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2 FINDINGS
2.1 2.1.1 CULTIVATION COCA CULTIVATION

In 2005, the total area under coca cultivation in Colombia increased by 6,000 hectares, a 8% increase compared to previous year’s estimate of 80,000 hectares. This is the first increase following four consecutive years of annual decreased in Colombia, between 2000 and 2004. During that period, coca cultivation decreased by 51% and the 2005’s area under coca cultivation is 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 of the year, in this case as of December 2005. As was the case last year, it covered the whole country and detected coca cultivation in 23 departments out of 32. In 2005, the area under coca cultivation represents 0.08% of the total territory. Figure 1. Coca cultivation in Colombia, 1995 – 2005 (in hectares)

160,000 140,000 120,000 Hectares 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 Hectares Sources

1995 51,000

1996 67,000

1997 79,000

1998 102,000

1999 160,000

2000 163,000

2001 145,000

2002 102,000

2003 86,000

2004 80,000

2005 86,000

United States Department of State

National Monitoring System Supported by UNODC

The increase in coca cultivation between 2004 and 2005 took place despite high level of aerial spraying, which in 2005 reached 138,780 hectares. In fact, aerial spraying of coca cultivation has remained 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 manual eradication was unprecedented, as it only reached 2,700 hectares in 2003 and 4,000 hectares in 2004.

10

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Table 1:

Stable and new fields of coca bush in 2005
Identified in 2004 and 2005 Not detected in 2004 Number of fields 10,801 11,551 9,340 8,028 2,488 953 386 43,547 % of % of Area total total (hectares) fields area 58 67 70 73 51 62 66 65 18,066 13,803 12,970 11,121 6,634 1,612 430 64,636 70 78 83 80 68 70 80 75 Total 2005 Total Total Area Fields (hectares) 18,759 17,160 13,407 10,997 4,874 1,528 581 67,306 25,963 17,633 15,632 13,951 9,709 2,320 542 85,750

Region

% of % of Number Area total total of fields (hectares) fields area 7,958 5,609 4,067 2,969 2,386 575 195 23,759 42 33 30 27 49 38 34 35 7,896 3,829 2,662 2,831 3,076 708 112 21,114 30 22 17 20 32 31 21 25

Meta-Guaviare Pacific Central PutumayoCaquetá Orinoquia Amazonia Sierra Nevada TOTAL

The comparison of the position of the coca fields in 2004 and 2005 revealed that about 65% of the fields were in a different position or at least not observed in 2004 for various reasons (aerial spraying, recently harvested, recently planted, etc) and therefore not in production and not accounted for in the 2004 census. This is to say that not necessary all of these coca fields can be qualified as new fields planted in 2005 because its identification as new is not referred to the age of the cultivation but to the position of the field. For a better assessment of the dynamic of coca cultivation in Colombia, a comparison was made between the position of the coca fields identified in 2005 and the position of the fields identified between 2001 and 2004. In total, 44% of the fields identified in 2005 had never been detected before. 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 Region % of % of Number Area total total of fields (hectares) fields area 12,728 8,750 6,160 5,806 3,106 786 259 37,595 68 51 56 43 64 51 45 56 12,516 5,744 6,178 3,387 4,487 997 151 29,840 48 33 40 24 46 43 28 39 Number of fields 6,031 8,410 4,837 7,601 1,768 742 322 29,711 New in 2005 % of % of Area total total (hectares) fields area 32 49 44 57 36 49 55 44 13,446 11,888 9,454 10,565 5,223 1,323 391 52,290 52 67 60 76 54 57 72 61 Total 2005 Total Total Area Fields (hectares) 18,759 17,160 10,997 13,407 4,874 1,528 581 67,306 25,963 17,633 15,632 13,951 9,709 2,320 542 85,750

Meta-Guaviare Pacific PutumayoCaquetá Central Orinoquia Amazonia Sierra Nevada TOTAL

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

11

Coca cultivation density change in Colombia, 2004 - 2005
75°W
Colombia

70°W

Caribbean Sea
La Guajira

South America

Barranquilla
Atlántico Magdalena Cesar
10°N

Cartagena
10°N

PA NA

Sucre Córdoba

Bolívar

VENEZUELA
Norte de Santander

5°N

Pacific Ocean
Valle

Quindío

Cundinamarca

Bogotá
Tolima

Cali

Meta

Cauca

Huila Neiva
San José

Guainía

Popayán
Tumaco

Nariño

Florencia

Guaviare

Mitú Pasto
Caquetá Vaupés Puerto Asís

Putumayo

ECUADOR
Amazonas

BRAZIL

Strong decrease Decrease Stable Increase Strong increase International boundaries Department boundaries
0

PERU
Leticia
150
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

300 km

5°S

75°W

70°W

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

5°S

5°N

A M
Chocó

Cucutá

Arauca
Antioquia Santander Arauca

Medellín
Boyacá Casanare Vichada

Puerto Carreño

Risaralda Caldas

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

In absolute numbers, the most important increases of coca crops between 2004 and 2005 were noted in the departments of Putumayo (+ 4,600 hectares) in the Southern part of the country and Vichada (+3,100 hectares) in the Orinoco region bordering Venezuela. The increase in Putumayo corresponded to doubling the area under coca cultivation between 2004 and 2005, from 4,390 hectares to 8,960 hectares. Putumayo used to be the centre of coca cultivation, with 66,000 hectares in 2000. Coca cultivation had strongly declined until 2004, but this year’s increase could indicate a return of farmers to coca cultivation. The largest reductions of coca crops took place in the departments of Norte de Santander (- 2,200 hectares) and Caqueta (- 1,500 hectares). The strong decrease in Norte de Santander, at the border with Venezuela, meant that there was a small coca cultivation left in 2005 in this department, with less than 1,000 hectares. In 2005 Norte de Santander was among the departments with the lowest levels of coca cultivation. Compared to 2004, Meta – despite a decrease of 1,430 hectares - and Nariño remained the first two departments in terms of coca cultivation, together accounting for 36% of the total area under coca cultivation in the country. In fact 78% of the 2005 cultivation took place in just seven departments, the same seven departments that also accounted for 78% of 2004 total cultivation: Meta, Nariño, Putumayo, Guaviare, Vichada, Antioquia and Caqueta. Table 3: Coca cultivation by department in Colombia, 1999 – 2005 (hectares)
Mar1999 11,384 3,959 58,297 28,435 3,644 23,718 5,897 1,920 6,291 Aug2000 11,123 9,343 66,022 17,619 4,935 2,547 26,603 5,960 117 4,576 978 250 2,826 6,280 853 1,493 322 321 200 66 76 160,119 160,000 12 12% 162,510 163,000 21 41% Nov2001 11,425 7,494 47,120 25,553 9,166 3,171 14,516 4,824 652 3,139 2,749 354 415 532 9,145 1,318 1,918 245 385 480 22 184 144,807 145,000 22 100% Dec2002 Dec2003 Dec2004 18,740 14,154 4,386 9,769 4,692 5,168 6,500 3,402 1,536 1,266 1,552 323 1,124 783 3,055 721 1,084 359 556 706 358 71 45 80,350 80,000 23 100% Dec2005 17,305 13,875 8,963 8,658 7,826 6,414 4,988 3,670 3,136 2,705 1,883 1,025 981 897 844 752 671 342 329 213 189 56 28 85,750 86,000 23 100% 100% % Change 2004-2005 -8% -2% 104% -11% 67% 24% -23% 8% 104% 114% 21% 219% -13% 15% -73% 4% -38% -5% -41% -70% -47% -15% -33% +6.7% + 7% % of 2005 total 20% 16% 10% 10% 9% 7% 6% 4% 4% 3% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0.4% 0.4% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.03%

Department Meta Nariño Putumayo Guaviare Vichada Antioquia Caquetá Bolívar Córdoba Cauca Arauca Chocó Santander Amazonas N. de Santander Guainía Vaupés Boyacá Guajira Magdalena Caldas Cundinamarca Valle del Cauca TOTAL Rounded Total Department affected Country coverage

15,039 1,014

521

9,222 12,814 15,131 17,628 13,725 7,559 27,381 16,163 4,910 3,818 3,030 4,273 8,412 7,230 2,735 4,470 385 838 2,120 1,443 2,214 539 453 463 632 784 625 8,041 4,471 749 726 1,485 1,157 118 594 354 275 644 484 54 57 57 111 37 102,071 86,340 102,000 86,000 21 100% 23 100%

13

Coca cultivation density in Colombia, 2004 Coca cultivation density in Colombia, 2005
75°W
Colombia

75°W 70°W

70°W

Colombia

Caribbean Sea Caribbean Sea
La Guajira
Barranquilla South America Cartagena
10°N 10°N

La Guajira Magdalena Atlántico

Barranquilla

South America

Cartagena

Magdalena Atlántico Cesar
Rí o M

10°N

ag

PA

dal en

ag

a

NA

Sucre

VENEZUELA
MA
Córdoba
Cucutá

PA
NA
Sucre Bolívar Norte de Santander

dal

en a

VENEZUELA

ato

Atr

ato Atr

Río C auca

R ío

R ío

Medellín
Río Orin

Río C auca

et

Caldas

5°N 5°N

Casanare
oM

Caldas Cundinamarca
Bogotá

Casanare

5°N

Cundinamarca
ichada Río V

Vichada

Vichada
ichada Río V

Pacific Ocean
G Río

Risaralda Quindío

Bogotá

Pacific Ocean
Cali

Risaralda Quindío Tolima

Tolima
re uavia

Cali

Valle

Valle
len a

Meta

Meta
a
gd
Río

Río

aviare Gu

len a

gd

a
o Rí

Neiva

Ma

Cauca
Tumaco

San José

Cauca

Rí o

Popayán

Popayán

Tumaco

Huila

Huila Nariño
Florencia Pasto

Ma

ida Inír

Guainía

Neiva San José

oI Rí

a nírid

Guainía

Guaviare
Mitú

Guaviare
Mitú

Nariño Vaupés

Florencia

Pasto

Putumayo

Caquetá

Putumayo
Puerto Asís

Caquetá

Vaupés

Puerto Asís

Rí o

C aq u

Rí o
Rí o

et á
Pu

Caqu

et á
tu m

ECUADOR
Amazonas

Pu tu m

ayo

ECUADOR

ayo

Amazonas

Cultivation density (ha/km²)

o

BRAZIL

Cultivation density (ha/km²)

BRAZIL PERU

o

PERU
Am az on
as

Am a

zo n

as

Leticia

5°S

5°S

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

5°S

5°S

0.1 - 1.0 1.1 - 4.0 > 4.0 International boundaries Department boundaries
300 km
70°W

0

150

75°W

Geographic coordinates WGS 84

0.1 - 1.0 1.1 - 4.0 > 4.0 International boundaries Department boundaries

0
75°W

150

300 km
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

Leticia

70°W

5°N

oM

et

Chocó
a

Chocó

a

Río Orin

MA
Arauca

Córdoba

Bolívar

Norte de Santander

Cucutá

Arauca

Antioquia Arauca
Puerto Rí o A rau ca Carreño oco Medellín

Santander

Antioquia

Santander

Arauca

Puerto Rí o A rau ca Carreño oco

Boyacá

Boyacá

10°N

Cesar

Rí o M

Rí o

Changes in coca cultivation in Colombia, 2001 - 2005
75°W
Colombia

70°W

Caribbean Sea
La Guajira

South America

Barranquilla
Atlántico Magdalena

Cartagena
10°N

Cesar
Río Ma

da

PA NA

lena

Sucre Córdoba

Bolívar

VENEZUELA
Norte de Santander

Cucutá

Arauca
Río Ca uca

Antioquia

o trat

Santander

Arauca

Puerto
R í o A rauc a Carreño

Río A

Medellín
Boyacá
e ta

Chocó Caldas
5°N

Casanare

Pacific Ocean
Valle

Risaralda Quindío Tolima

Cundinamarca

Bogotá

ichada Río V

Cali
na

Meta

G Río

iare uav

Cauca

ag d a

le

Neiva San José

Popayán
Tumaco

Huila Nariño

Río M

oI Rí

a nírid

Guainía

Florencia

Guaviare

Mitú Pasto
Caquetá Puerto Asís

Vaupés

Putumayo
Río Ca

quet á

P

ECUADOR

u tu ma

yo

Amazonas

BRAZIL

PERU

Am a

o

Abandonned coca fields Stable coca fields New coca fields International boundaries Department boundaries

zo n

as

Leticia
0

150
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

300 km

5°S

75°W

70°W

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

5°S


R ío

5°N

oM

Vichada

Río Orin o

co

10°N

g

A M

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

In 2005, coca cultivation in Colombia represented 70% of the world coca cultivation, while Peru and Bolivia represented respectively 20% and 10%. The global level of coca cultivation remained stable between 2004 and 2005, as the increase in Colombia was offset by decreases in Peru and Bolivia.

Figure 2. Coca cultivation in the Andean region 1995 - 2005 (in hectares)
250,000

200,000

150,000 hectares 100,000 50,000

0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
Bolivia

2000
Colombia

2001
Peru

2002

2003

2004

2005

Table 4:

Coca cultivation in the Andean region 1995 - 2005 (in hectares)
1995 1996 48,100 94,400 67,000 209,500 1997 45,800 68,800 79,000 193,600 1998 38,000 51,000 102,000 191,000 1999 21,800 38,700 160,000 220,500 2000 14,600 43,400 163,000 221,000 2001 19,900 46,200 145,000 211,100 2002 21,600 46,700 102,000 173,100 2003 23,600 44,200 86,000 153,800 2004 27,700 50,300 80,000 158,000 2005 25,400 48,200 86,000 159,600 % Change 2004-2005 -8% -4% 8% 1%

Bolivia Peru Colombia Total

48,600 115,300 51,000 214,900

Sources

United States Department of State

National Monitoring System Supported by UNODC

17

Coca cultivation by region in Colombia, 2001 - 2005
75°W 70°W
Colombia

Caribbean Sea
La Guajira

South America

Barranquilla
Atlántico

Cartagena
10°N

Sierra Nevada
Cesar Magdalena
10°N

540

PA NA

VENEZUELA
Sucre Bolívar Córdoba Norte de Santander

15,630

Chocó Caldas
5°N

Casanare

9,710

17,630

Pacific Ocean
Cali

Valle

Risaralda Quindío Tolima

Cundinamarca

Bogotá

Vichada

Orinoco

Meta

Pacific
Popayán Cauca Tumaco
Nariño

Neiva
Huila

25,960

Guainía

Florencia
Caquetá

Meta Guaviare
13,950
Guaviare Vaupés Mitú

Pasto Puerto Asís

Putumayo

Putumayo Caquetá
ECUADOR
Amazonas

2,320

Amazonia

BRAZIL

Coca cultivation (ha)
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

PERU

Leticia
0

150
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

International boundaries Department boundaries

300 km

5°S

75°W

70°W

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

5°S

5°N

M

A

Cucutá Arauca
Santander

Medellín

Antioquia

Central
Boyacá

Arauca

Puerto Carreño

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.1.1.1 Regional analysis In 2005, 46% of the coca cultivation in Colombia took place in the two traditional coca growing regions of Meta-Guaviare and Putumayo-Caqueta, both situated in the south-eastern part of the country. In absolute terms, the largest increases took place in Orinoco (+ 3,459 hectares), in the north-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 coca cultivation took place in the northern region of Sierra Nevada (- 57%), but in absolute numbers, this only 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)
% Change 2004 2005 % of 2005 total

Region Meta-Guaviare Pacific Central PutumayoCaqueta Orinoco Amazonia Sierra Nevada Rounded Total

2001 36,978 11,171 18,474 61,636 11,915 3,768 865 145,000

2002 36,603 17,362 14,829 22,137 7,124 3,018 998 102,000

2003 28,977 19,561 15,389 14,789 4,357 2,508 759 86,000

2004 28,507 15,789 15,081 10,888 6,250 2,588 1,262 80,000

2005

25,963 17,633 15,632 13,951 9,709 2,320 542 86,000

-9% 12% 4% 28% 55% -10% -57% 7%

30% 21% 18% 16% 11% 3% 1% 100%

Figure 3. Coca cultivation in Colombia by region 2001 - 2005 (in hectares)
60,000

50,000

40,000 hectares

30,000

20,000

10,000

MetaGuaviare Pacific Central 2001 PutumayoCaqueta 2002 2003 Orinoco 2004 2005 Amazonian Sierra Nevada

19

Coca cultivation density in the Meta-Guaviare region, Colombia 2005
Antioquia
P AN A
MA

74°W

72°W

Arauca

Santander
6°N
COLOMBIA VENEZUELA

Caldas Boyacá
ECUADOR PERU BRAZIL

Yopal

Casanare

Bogotá

Cundinamarca
Cabuyaro Cumaral Puerto Gaitán Puerto López

4°N

Acacias Guamal San Luis de Cubarral El Castillo

Villavicencio San Carlos Guaroa

Tolima

San Martín

Mesetas

San Juan de Arama Puerto Lleras

Meta
Mapiripán

Huila
La Uribe Vista Hermosa

Río

M

eta

Río Guavia re
Puerto Rico Puerto Concordia

San José

San José del Guaviare

Guainía
nírid R ío I
El Retorno

La Macarena

a

2°N

Guaviare
Calamar

oV

au p e

s

Miraflores
Miraflores

Vaupés

Mitú

Vaupés Caquetá

Cultivation density (ha/km²)
0.1 - 1.0 1.1 - 2.0 2.1 - 4.0 4.1 - 8.0 >8 International boundaries Department boundaries Municipality boundaries Roads Meta Guaviare Region

n guá Ca Río

Putumayo

Río

Ca q

uetá

Amazonas
Río P

0

100
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

200
km

PERU

o

74°W

72°W

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

2°N

4°N

a ichad Río V

Vichada

6°N

u tu
ma

y

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.1.1.2 Meta-Guaviare region Table 6: Coca cultivation in Meta-Guaviare, 1999 – 2005
1999 11,384 28,435 39,819 2000 11,123 17,619 28,742 -28% 2001 11,425 25,553 36,978 29% 2002 9,222 27,381 36,603 -1% 2003 12,814 16,163 28,977 -21% 2004 18,740 9,769 28,509 -2% 2005 % Change 2004-2005

Department Meta Guaviare Total Annual trend

17,305 8,658 25,970 -9%

-8% -11%

In 2004 and 2005, the department of Meta remained the department with the largest level of coca cultivation, even though coca cultivation decreased of 8%, from 18,740 hectares in 2004 to 17,300 hectares 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 Meta department. This represented 55% of the total aerial spraying in the region, though coca cultivation in Meta represented 67% of the total coca crops for both departments and the highest level of cultivation using high agro-technical efficiency. Between 2004 and 2005, in the department of Guaviare, coca cultivation decreased from 9,769 hectares to 8,658 hectares (-11%). At the same time, aerial spraying decreased from 30,900 hectares in 2004 to 11,900 hectares in 2005. Among the thirteen national parks surveyed, the National Park of Sierra de la Macarena, located within Meta department, experienced the largest level of coca cultivation within a protected area in 2005, 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 the absence of clouds in the images of that year. Guaviare was the department where coca cultivation first appeared in Colombia at the end of the seventies. Since then coca cultivation remained important in the department. However, an encouraging decrease has been noted in the past few years and the 8,650 hectares observed in 2005, only represented 32% of the 27,381 hectares observed in 2002, mainly owing to important aerial spraying campaigns. In 2005, Guaviare accounted for 10% of the national total.

Coca field of high agro-technical efficiency in Meta department

21

Coca cultivation density in the Pacific region, Colombia 2005
78°W 76°W

Sucre

Montería
PA N A M A

VENEZUELA

8°N

PANAMA
ECUADOR PERU BRAZIL

Cultivation density (ha/km²)
0.1 - 1.0 1.1 - 2.0 2.1 - 4.0 4.1 - 8.0
6°N
ra t o Río A t

Antioquia
Río Cauca

Medellín
6°N

>8 International boundaries Department boundaries Roads Pacific Region
Quibdó

Chocó Caldas
Manizales

Bogotá Ibagué
Río San J uan

Cundinamarca Tolima
4°N

Pacific Ocean
Valle

4°N

Cali

Huila
Ma gd a lena

Neiva Neiva

Meta

Cauca
Popayán

2°N

Río

ío

Tumaco

Florencia

Nariño
Pasto Mocoa

Caquetá

ECUADOR
Putumayo
0 100
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

200
km

2°N 0°
78°W 76°W

8°N
o Rí gu Ca

COLOMBIA

Córdoba

Bolívar

R

tí a Pa

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

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.1.1.3 Pacific region Table 7: Coca cultivation in the Pacific Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)
% Change 20042005

Department Nariño Cauca Chocó Valle del Cauca Total Annual trend

1999 3,959 6,291

2000 9,343 4,576 250 76

2001 7,494 3,139 354 184 11,171 -22%

2002 15,131 2,120 111 17,362 55%

2003 17,628 1,443 453 37 19,561 13%

2004 14,154 1,266 323 45 15,788 -19%

2005 13,875 2,705 1,025 28 17,633

-2% 114% 219% -33%

10,250

14,245 39%

12%

Nariño is located in the south-western part of the country, at the border with Ecuador. The geographic 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 illegal drugs and precursors through the department. Coca cultivation in Nariño became significant in 2002, at a time when coca cultivation decreased in the neighbouring departments of Putumayo and Caqueta. Between 2001 and 2002, coca cultivation decreased by 40,000 hectares in Caqueta and Putumayo, while increasing by 7,600 hectares in Nariño. Aerial spraying has been intense in Nariño department since 2000, exceeding 30,000 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 of coca cultivation, Nariño has the second highest amount of land under illicit cultivation and 16% of the total coca cultivation in the country. It is worth noting that Nariño accounted for 51% of all the fields of less than ¼ hectares found in the country, which is an indication of the coca cultivation practices in Nariño.

Like neighbouring Nariño department, Cauca has a long coastline, high mountain ranges and a mainly rural economy, but coca cultivation remained relatively low in Cauca department. However, following a period of continuous decrease between 1999 and 2004, coca cultivation increased between 2004 and 2005 by 1,420 hectares (+114%), despite aerial spraying which for the first time exceeded 3,000 hectares. Several alternative development projects have been implemented in Cauca, 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, the department of Valle del Cauca always recorded less than 200 hectares under coca cultivation.

23

Coca cultivation density in the Central region, Colombia 2005
76°W

Santa Marta Barranquilla

74°W

72°W

P AN

A

MA

La Guajira
VENEZUELA

Atlántico
Cartagena COLOMBIA

Valledupar

Cesar
10°N
ECUADOR PERU BRAZIL

Magdalena
Río Mag da

VENEZUELA

Sincelejo

Caribbean Sea
Río Catatum b

Sucre
Montería

o

Catatumbo

Córdoba
8°N

Bolívar

Norte de Santander
8°N 4°N 6°N

Norte de Antioquia Sur de Bolívar

Cucutá

Bucaramanga

Antioquia
Río A tr
Río Cauca
ato

Santander Arauca
Medellín

6°N

Quibdó

Chocó Risaralda Caldas
Manizales

Boyacá Casanare

Yopal

Cultivation density (ha/km²)
San Ju an

Bogotá Ibagué

Cundinamarca

Meta

International boundaries Department boundaries Valle Roads Central Region 76°W Cauca

0

100
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

200 km

Huila

74°W

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

Río

0.1 - 1.0 1.1 - 2.0 2.1 - 4.0 4.1 - 8.0 >8

Tolima

Villavicencio
M

4°N

eta

10°N

le n a

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.1.1.4 Central region Table 8: Coca cultivation in the Central Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)
1999 3,644 5,897 1,920 15,039 26,500 2000 2,547 5,960 117 2,826 6,280 322 66 18,118 -32% 2001 3,171 4,824 652 415 9,145 245 22 18,474 2% 2002 3,030 2,735 385 463 8,041 118 57 14,829 -20% 2003 4,273 4,470 838 632 4,471 594 54 57 15,389 4% 2004 5,168 3,402 1,536 1,124 3,055 359 358 71 15,073 -2% 2005 % Change 2004-2005

Department Antioquia Bolivar Cordoba Santander Norte Santander Boyacá Caldas Cundinamarca Total Annual trend

6,414 3,670 3,136 981 844 342 189 56 15,632 4%

25% 8% 101% -13% -72% -5% -47% -15%

Since 2002, coca cultivation remained stable at around 15,000 hectares in the Central region of Colombia. Between 2004 and 2005, coca cultivation increased by 4% to reach 15,632 hectares. At the end of the nineties, Norte de Santander department was one of the most important centres of coca cultivation in the country, accounting for 10% of the country total in 1999. Between 2002 and 2004, aerial spraying averaged 10,000 hectares per year over this area, but in 2005 dropped to less than 1,000 hectares. At the same time, important alternative development projects have been implemented. Consequently, between 1999 and 2005, the Government has been able to reduce drastically coca cultivation in this department. In 2005, coca cultivation accounted for only 850 hectares, 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 Sur de 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 in the area might be attributed to a combination of aerial spraying and implementation of alternative development 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 cultivation has been increasing since 2002, from 3,030 hectares to 6,410 hectares in 2005. This increase over the past three years occurred despite the intensification of aerial spraying, from 3,300 hectares in 2002 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 of coca cultivation were detected for the first time in 2003. Coca cultivation reached a peak in 2004 with 358 hectares, but decreased to 190 hectares in 2005. 25

Coca cultivation density in the Putumayo-Caqueta region, Colombia 2005
76°W 74°W 72°W

Boyacá Caldas
P A N AMA

Yopal

Casanare

VENEZUELA

Manizales

Chocó
Bogotá
COLOMBIA

Cundinamarca

Ibagué

4°N

Valle

Cali

Tolima

Meta
Neiva

Huila Cauca
Popayán
agd alen a

Río M

PERU

et

a

Río Gua viare

San José
I Río

4°N
d níri

ECUADOR

Villavicencio
BRAZIL

a

2°N

Río M

Guaviare
Florencia Puerto Rico El Doncello El Paujil

Florencia

Nariño
Pasto
Santiago

Mocoa

Colón San Francisco

San José de la Fragua Albania Curillo

Va up

és

Morelia La Montañita Valparaiso Solita Milán San Vicente del Caguán

Miraflores

Mocoa

Villa Garzón Puerto Caicedo Puerto Guzmán

Caquetá
Cartagena del Chaira Puerto Leguizamo

Vaupés

Orito

Puerto Asís
Valle del Guamuéz San Miguel

Putumayo
Puerto Asís

g uán

Solano

R ío

Ca

Río

Ca q uetá

ay

o

Amazonas

ECUADOR Cultivation density (ha/km²)
0.1 - 1.0 1.1 - 2.0 2.1 - 4.0 4.1 - 8.0 >8 International boundaries Department boundaries Municipality boundaries Roads Putumayo Caquetá Region
76°W

2°S

PERU
A Río
0 100
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

ma

zon

as

200
km

74°W

72°W

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

2°S


ut u R ío P
m

2°N

o Rí

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.1.1.5 Putumayo-Caqueta region Table 9: Coca cultivation in the Putumayo-Caqueta Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)
1999 23,718 58,297 82,015 2000 26,603 66,022 92,625 13% 2001 14,516 47,120 61,636 -33% 2002 8,412 13,725 22,137 -64% 2003 7,230 7,559 14,789 -33% 2004 6,500 4,386 10,886 -26% 2005 % Change 2004-2005

Department Caquetá Putumayo Total Annual trend

4,988 8,963 13,951 28%

-23% 105%

In 2000, coca cultivation peaked in Putumayo department at 66,000 hectares, representing 40% of the national total. Following four years of consecutive decreases, coca cultivation in Putumayo was estimated at 4,400 hectares or 5% of the national total in 2004, but this trend was reversed and between 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 there were few new alternative development activities in 2005. Most of the new coca fields were established on the foot hills close to the border with Cauca department. Spraying is particularly difficult in these mountainous areas, which could be a reason for 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, in the departments of Nariño and Putumayo, almost 4,000 hectares of coca cultivation were found in 2005. This represented an increase of 1,000 hectares (or 32%) compared to the same area in 2004. In Caqueta department, coca cultivation peaked at 26,000 hectares in 2000 or 16% of the country total. Following intense aerial spraying that started in 1996 with 537 hectares and peaked in 2002 at 18,600 hectares, coca cultivation decreased. In 2005, coca cultivation was at its lowest level at 4,990 hectares, or 6% of the country total.

Coca fields in Putumayo department

27

Coca cultivation density in the Orinoco region, Colombia 2005
72°W 70°W

Cultivation density (ha/km²)
0.1 - 1.0 1.1 - 2.0 2.1 - 4.0 4.1 - 8.0 >8 International boundaries Department boundaries Municipality boundaries Roads Orinoco Region

68°W

P AN

AM

A

VENEZUELA

COLOMBIA

ECUADOR

BRAZIL PERU

Cucutá

8°N

VENEZUELA
Arauca

Saravena Fortul Tame Puerto Rondón Cravo Norte

Arauca

Arauca Arauquita

Río

Ara u ca

Puerto Carreño
Puerto Carreno

6°N

La Primavera

omo Río T

Casanare
Santa Rosalía

Vichada

a ichad Río V
Cumaribo

Río Orinoco

4°N

Río

M

eta

Puerto Inírida

Meta

Guainía
Río Guavi are

I Río

da níri

Guaviare
2°N 2°N
0 72°W 100
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

Vaupés

200
km

70°W

BRAZIL

68°W

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

4°N

6°N

8°N

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.1.1.6 Orinoco region Table 10: Coca cultivation in the Orinoco Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)
Department 1999 2000 4,935 978 5,913 2001 9,166 2,749 11,915 102% 2002 4,910 2,214 7,124 -40% 2003 3,818 539 4,357 -39% 2004 4,692 1,552 6,244 43% 2005 % Change 2004-2005

Vichada Arauca Total Annual trend

7,826 1,883 9,709 56%

67% 21% -

In Vichada department, near the Venezuelan border, coca cultivation peaked at 9,200 hectares in 2001. 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 the 2004-2005 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 the department, towards the Venezuelan border. The dispersion of coca cultivation in remote parts of the department increases the time flight and cost of aerial spraying. As a result, aerial spraying has always been relatively low in this department (below 3,000 hectares), and for 2005, no aerial spraying was reported. Coca cultivation in Arauca was detected for the first time in 2000 with about 1,000 hectares. It went over 2,000 hectares in 2001 and 2002. In 2003, aerial spraying amounted to 12,000 hectares and coca cultivation dropped to 500 hectares in December of that year. However, it increased again in 2004 and 2005 to reach 1,883 hectares.

Coca fields in Arauca department interspersed with licit crops

29

Coca cultivation density in the Amazonia region, Colombia 2005
74°W 72°W

Arauca 70°W Casanare

6°N

PAN

A AM

VENEZUELA

COLOMBIA

Yopal

Vichada Cundinamarca
Bogotá
ECUADOR BRAZIL PERU

Rí o V

ichad

a

Río Orinoco

Boyacá

VENEZUELA
Puerto Inírida
4°N 4°S 2°S 0° 2°N
La Guadalupe

4°N

Meta
Barranco Mina

Río

M

eta

Inirida

Cacahual

ida Iní r Río

Río Gu aviare

San José

Morichal Nuevo

Guainía
Pana Pana

Puerto Colombia

San Felipe

2°N

Guaviare
Papunahua

Miraflores
Carurú

Rí o

Mitú
Va Mitú u pé s
Yavarate

Vaupés
á gu Ca ío R
n

Caquetá
Pacoa La Victoria

ap

o ris

Mirití Paraná

t

ma yo

Puerto Alegría

Puerto Santander La Chorrera

Taraira

Río C

aquet á

La Pedrera

BRAZIL

a

Par ana

Amazonas
Puerto Arica

2°S

El Encanto

PERU
Tarapaca

Cultivation density (ha/km²)
0.1 - 1.0 1.1 - 2.0 2.1 - 4.0 4.1 - 8.0 >8 International boundaries Department boundaries Municipality boundaries Roads Amazon Region
Puerto Leticia Nariño Rí o Amazonas

4°S

Leticia

0

100
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

200
km

74°W

72°W

70°W

68°W

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

6°N

Santander

R í o A r auc a

68°W

Puerto Carreño

Rí o
Ap

Rí o
Pu
u

Rí o
Ig
ra

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.1.1.7 Amazonia region Table 11: Coca cultivation in the Amazonia Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)
Department Vaupés Amazonas Guainía Total Annual trend 1999 1,014 1,014 2000 1,493 853 2,346 2001 1,918 532 1,318 3,768 61% 2002 1,485 784 749 3,018 -20% 2003 1,157 625 726 2,508 -17% 2004 1,084 783 721 2,588 3% 2005 % Change 2004-2005

671 897 752 2,320 -10%

-38% 15% 5%

Like Putumayo-Caqueta region, the departments of Vaupés, Amazonas and Guainía belong to the Amazon basin. Although sharing important similarity with Putumayo and Caqueta, these three departments, 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 region to the rest of the country. Consequently, aerial spraying of coca cultivation was almost not existent, except in Vaupés. Coca cultivation remained relatively stable in the region, at around 3,000 hectares, since coca cultivation was first observed in 2000.

Coca field surrounded by forest areas in the Amazon region

31

Coca cultivation density in the Sierra Nevada region, Colombia 2005
74°W 73°W 72°W

13°N

P AN A M

A

VENEZUELA

n Sea
ECUADOR

COLOMBIA

BRAZIL PERU

12°N

Riohacha

Santa Marta

11°N

Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta

Magdalena
Valledupar

10°N

Cesar

Gulf of Maracaibo

Río C

Sucre

bo tum ata

9°N

Norte de Santander Bolívar
8°N

Cultivation density (ha/km²)
0.1 - 1.0 1.1 - 2.0 2.1 - 4.0 4.1 - 8.0 >8
8°N

Antioquia

Cucutá

0

50
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

100 km

74°W

Santander73°W

International boundaries Department boundaries Roads Sierra Nevada Region 72°W

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

9°N

VENEZUELA

10°N
Río M agdale

11°N
na

12°N

Caribbean Sea

La Guajira

13°N

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.1.1.8 Sierra Nevada region Table 12: Coca cultivation in the Sierra Nevada region, Colombia, 1999 – 2005
Department Magdalena Guajira Total Annual trend 1999 521 521 2000 200 321 521 0% 2001 480 385 865 66% 2002 644 354 998 15% 2003 484 275 759 -24% 2004 706 556 1,262 66% 2005 % Change 2004-2005

213 329 542 -57%

-70% -41%

The Sierra Nevada region, with the departments of Magdalena and Guajira, has never been an important centre of coca cultivation in Colombia. Coca cultivation remained between 500 and 1,300 hectares over the last seven years. Between 2004 and 2005, coca cultivation decreased by an impressive 57%, to reach one of its lowest level with only 540 hectares. Coca cultivation remained located mainly in the fringe of lowlands between the high mountains of the Sierra Nevada and the sea shore. However, the region is an important area for narco-trafficking activities, in particular for the shipping of drugs to the Caribbean Islands and the United States. For a few years already, the Sierra Nevada region benefited from important aid for alternative development, mainly due to the existence Sierra Nevada National Park. Government’s data indicated 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. The National Park is one of the most important ecological reserves in Latin America, known for its rich bio-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 to 2004.

Coca fields in Sierra Nevada region Source: Organización Gonawidua Tayrona 33

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Coca fields in the Sierra Nevada region

Coca fields in the Sierra Nevada region

34

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.1.1.9 Possible areas of new cultivation The survey covered and interpreted 100% of the national territory, including areas previously not known as being coca growing regions. In doing so it serves as an early warning system to detect and prevent the spread of coca into new areas. Potential small coca fields have been detected in remote areas outside the established agricultural areas of the departments of the Orinoco and Amazon river basins. Field verification has not been carried out in theses areas because it was considered too time consuming and too costly to verify small and isolated patches of coca cultivation. Because of the absence of field verification, the estimate for coca cultivation in these areas are presented as indicative and not included in the final estimate. The 2005 survey 15 LandSat images analysed for vegetation having similar characteristics as coca fields. A total of 276 hectares were assessed as possible coca cultivation in new area. Table 13: Possible coca cultivation in new areas in 2005 Department Amazonas Vichada Vaupés Meta Total hectares 116 79 77 4 276

New coca fields in Choco

35

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.1.1.10 Coca plant varieties The coca leaf yield survey carried out between May 2005 and February 2006 was the opportunity to collect samples of coca plants for the determination of their taxonomic varieties. The botanical study of the samples was performed by the Forest Herbarium of the University Francisco José de Caldas in Bogotá. A total of 439 samples were studied, from which 3 varieties of 2 species of coca plants were identified. Although only three varieties were encountered, it should be noted that farmers refer to a wide range of names, and sometimes the same vernacular names are used for two, sometimes three different botanical varieties. The reasons for this wide range of vernacular names are the difficulties to identify the botanical varieties which differ only by minute details, but also the variability the coca plants themselves within a same variety. A short description of the three varieties found in the sample is presented below. Collection of botanical samples Species: Erythroxylum coca Lam.3 Variety: Erythroxylum coca Lam. var. coca This variety was the most popular, constituting 59% of the sample. The most common names attributed by the farmers to this variety have been: “Peruana”, “Tingo María” and “Boliviana”. It is a bush of up to 3 meters, with elliptic leaves, sharp end, and a pedicel of 2 to 7 mm. The fruits are ellipsoids of 6 to 12 mm long. This variety is widely distributed throughout the country and can be found between 0 and 2000 meters above sea level.

Erythroxylum coca Lam. var. coca
3

Lam. From Chevalier de Lamarck, title of Jean Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet 1744-1829, French Naturalist

37

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Variety: Erythroxylum coca Lam. Var. ipadu Plowman This variety represented 21% of the sample. The most common names attributed by the farmers to this variety have been “Dulce” and “Amarga”. Both fall in the rank of morphologic variation described for the variety. It differs from the variety coca by the rounded end of leaf. This variety is confined to the Amazonia region, between 100 and 500 meters above sea level.

Erythroxylum coca Lam. Var. ipadu Plowman 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 attributed by farmers to this variety were “Pajarito” and “Caucana”. This bush of up to six meters is taller than the other species. The leaves are more oblong and elongated than 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 in the Sierra Nevada region and occasionally in Arauca.

Erythroxylum coca novogranatense (Morris) Hierron. Var. novogranatense 38

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

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

39

Index of livelihood conditions* by department in 2003 and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005
75°W
Colombia

70°W

Caribbean Sea

South America

Barranquilla
Atlántico Magdalena

La Guajira

Cartagena
10°N

Cesar
Río Ma

da

PA NA

len a

VENEZUELA
Norte de Santander

Sucre Bolívar

Córdoba

Cucutá
Chocó
Río Ca uca
o trat

Santander Antioquia

Arauca

Río A

Medellín

Arauca

R í o A rauc a

Puerto Carreño
Río Orino
co

Boyacá Caldas
5°N

Vichada
oM
eta

Pacific Ocean
Valle

Risaralda Quindío Tolima

Bogotá
ichada Río V

Cali
Huila
na

Meta

G Río

iare uav

Cauca

Tumaco Florencia
Nariño

Río M

Popayán

ag d a

le

Neiva

San José

Guaviare

R

rida Iní ío

Guainía

Mitú Pasto Puerto Asís
Putumayo

Río Ca

Caquetá

Vaupés

quet á

BRAZIL

ECUADOR

utu

ma yo

Amazonas

Index of livelihood conditions* by department as of 2003
55 - 70 % 70 - 80 % 80 - 100 % No data

PERU
Rí o Ama z

on a

s

Leticia

Coca cultivation 2005 International boundaries Department boundaries

0

150
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

300 km

5°S

75°W

70°W

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 DNP The boundaries and names shown and the designations used in this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations

5°S

5°N

Cundinamarca

Casanare

10°N

g

M

A

R ío

P

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

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 a fertile ground for coca cultivation to proliferate. In cases where coca is planted as a result of choice and not coercion, poverty is one of the main causes together with a lack of respect for laws. In most cases, the emergence of illicit crops does not significantly increase peasants’ income, but can improve their basic subsistence when other income generating activities are not present. Coca farmers are far from being the main beneficiary from the huge profits generated by the illicit business. According to the MRPD4 of the National Department of Planning, poverty rate for Colombia in 2005 were estimated at 49.2% for poverty and 14.7% for extreme poverty. Rural poverty went up from 67.5% in 2004 to 68.2% in 2005, and in terms of the population size, the number of poor people in rural areas went up from 7.89 to 8.02 million persons. As for extreme poverty, the indicators showed a stable situation between 2004 and 2005 (27.6% in 2004 and 27.5% en 2005), and in terms of population size, about 3.23 millions persons were estimated living in extreme poverty. Table 14: Estimated poverty and extreme poverty 2001 – 2005 Year 2002 Poverty 2003 2004 2005 2002 Extreme poverty 2003 2004 Country 57,0 50,7 52,7 49,2 20,7 15,8 17,4 14,7 Urban area 50,2 46,3 47,3 42,3 15,5 12,6 13,7 10,2 Rural area 75,1 62,9 67,5 68,2 34,9 24,6 27,6 27,5

2005 Source: 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% in 2004 of the total GDP at constant price of 1994. The GDP of the agricultural sector showed one of the lowest increase rate compared to other sectors. This indicated a loss of the terms of exchange of the agricultural sector. The situation worsened in the 1990s following the disappearance of the protection instruments like aid or subsidies. However if Colombian poverty indicators are compared with those of other Andean Countries, the argument 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 Andean countries, which is not the case.

4

Misión para la Reducción de la Pobreza y la Desigualdad

41

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.1.1.12 Coca cultivation and displacement Violence, armed conflict, drug trafficking and the search for better living conditions have generated enormous displacement of persons over the past two decades. Significant differences in the number of internally displaced persons (IDPs) are recorded by different sources. The problem is known 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 level of 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 previous estimates, but the trend remains the same. However, no statistically significant correlation has so far been established at the department level between number of IDPs and coca cultivation.

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

450.000 400.000 350.000 people displaced 300.000 250.000 200.000 331.234 150.000 100.000 50.000 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 220.111 161.921 131.716 424.075 374.856

180.000 160.000 140.000 120.000 hectare 100.000 80.000 60.000 40.000 20.000 -

People displaced
Source: RSS – 2001 to 2004 data revised in 2005

Coca cultivation

43

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.1.1.13 Coca cultivation and the forest warden families programme UNODC is presently carrying out the monitoring the Government’s “Forest Warden Families Programme”. The main objective of the ‘Forest Warden Families Programme” is to motivate farmers to keep their land free of illicit crops. The programme also aims at the recovery of the forest in areas that are ecologically and socially vulnerable. The government and the families sign a contract with payments of a monthly salary (US$ 265) per family for a three years period. The map shows the geographic location of the 50 ongoing projects. The Forest Warden Families Programme has three main components: environmental, by the preservation of the environment with technical support of expert entities in the training of families for the establishment of productive and sustainable projects. The second component deals with the increase 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 financial aid to the beneficiary families. The selection criteria for the areas of each project is based on the identification of a number of districts 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 of this commitment from just one family in a given district implies the withdrawal of all families of that district from the project. However, in practice, this criterion has been replaced by the consideration of 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 the delivery of thematic cartography and technical support in multitemporal analysis of vegetation land covers as well as the verification of presence or absence of coca crops in the districts using remote sensing tools.

Forest warden families programme

45

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.1.1.14 Coca cultivation in National Parks The presence of illicit crops in both Natural Parks and Indigenous Territories has been monitored by SIMCI since the 2001 survey, and the data have been delivered to the competent authorities to enable them to identify actions and projects to be applied for the preservation of its social and environmental characteristics with minimum of harm. The limits of National Parks and Indian territories have been provided by the official entities in charge of their management. In 2005, the limits of National Parks were edited by the monitoring project in cooperation with technicians from the National Parks Administrative Unit. The editing improved 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 each of them depends on the accuracy of their delimitation. To enable annual comparison the same boundaries were used for each year. Coca cultivation in 2005 was found in 12 of the 51 National Parks in Colombia, them. With 6,100 hectares 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. This increase was mainly due to an increase in the National Parks of Sierra La Macarena (+647 hectares, or +24%), La Paya (+498 hectares or 217%) and Paramillo (+225 hectares or +49%). In most other National Parks, coca cultivation decreased, and almost completely disappeared from the 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 Parks 2003 (hectares) 2004 (hectares) 2005 (hectares) % Change 2004-2005

Sierra La Macarena Nukak La Paya Paramillo Tinigua Sierra Nevada Puinawai Catatumbo-Bari Alto Fragua Munchique Los Picachos Yariguíes Sanquianga Farallones Tayrona Total Rounded total

1,152 1,469 310 110 340 212 33 129 8 1 13 7 2 4 3,790 3,800

2,707 1,043 230 461 387 241 139 107 14 8 15 1 5,353 5,400

3,354 930 728 686 155 95 60 55 25 13 7 2 6,110 6,100

24% -11% 217% 49% -60% -61% -57% -49% 79% 63% -53% 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 coca cultivation estimates within these parks.

47

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

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 48

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.1.2

REPORTED OPIUM POPPY CULTIVATION

Opium poppy cultivation was introduced in Colombia in the 1980’s, in a few marginal agricultural zones, when coffee prices fell down. The farmers cultivated opium poppy at an altitude ranging between 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 Nariño, and in minor quantities in Cesar and Guajira. UNODC – so-far – has not monitored the extent of opium poppy cultivation in Colombia. According to Colombian Government figures, the total area under opium poppy cultivation as of December 2005, amounted to 2,000 hectares with a reduction of 50% compared to last year estimate of 4,000 hectares. Opium poppy cultivation in Colombia represented only 1% of the world opium poppy cultivation in 2005. Table 16: Opium poppy cultivation in Colombia, 2002 – 2005 (in hectares)
Department Cauca Nariño Huila Tolima Cesar Caqueta Guajira Caldas Total Rounded total
Source: DIRAN

2002 1,155 1,230 624 682 454 8 4,153 4,200

2003 600 540 636 1,359 651 240 4,026 4,000

2004 450 460 1,135 1,090 675 105 35 3,950 4,000

2005

% Change 2004-2005

% 2005 total

538 475 320 265 152 132 68
1,950 2,000

20% 3% -72% -76% -77% 26% 94%
-

-51%
-50%

28% 24% 16% 14% 8% 7% 3% 0% 100%

Figure 5. Opium poppy cultivation in Colombia, 2002 – 2005 (in hectares)
1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 hectares 800 600 400 200 Huila Tolima Cesar Nariño 2002 2003 Cauca 2004 2005 Caquetá Guajira Caldas

Source: DIRAN

50

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Table 17: Global opium poppy cultivation, 1995 – 2005 (in hectares)
1995 Afghanistan 53,800 Myanmar 154,000 Colombia 5,200 Others 37,000 Total 250,000 Source: UNDOC 1996 56,800 163,000 5,000 32,800 257,600 1997 58,400 155,200 6,600 31,800 252,000 1998 63,700 130,300 7,400 36,600 238,000 1999 90,600 89,500 6,500 29,600 216,200 2000 82,200 108,700 6,500 24,600 222,000 2001 7,600 105,000 4,300 25,200 142,100 2002 74,100 81,400 4,100 20,600 180,200 2003 80,000 62,200 4,100 22,300 168,600 2004 131,000 44,200 4,000 16,800 196,000 2005 104,000 32,800 1,950 12,750 151,500

Figure 6. Global opium poppy cultivation, 1995 – 2005 (in hectares)
Colombia 1% Myanmar 22%

Others 8%

Afghanistan 69%

Flowers and capsules in an opium poppy field

51

Coca yield by region in Colombia, 2005
75°W
Colombia

70°W

Caribbean Sea

South America

1610

5400

ÔÔÔÔ E E E
E

3.4 harvest/year

Sierra Nevada
10°N 10°N
Río Ma
da
g

PA NA

lena

VENEZUELA
1010 4600

Río A

Río Ca uca

o trat

e ta

5°N

Pacific Ocean

Pacifico

E

5.4aharvest/year ich da Río V

Orinoco
iare uav

G Río
1490 9900

na

2.5 harvest/year

ÔÔÔ E E E

Río M

ag d a

960

2600

le

Ô Ô Ô Ô Ô Ô ÔE E E E E E E
6.6 harvest/year

oI Rí

a nírid

Meta - Guaviare

1440

5600

Ô ÔÔÔ E E E E

3.9 harvest/year

Río Ca

quet á

ECUADOR
Annual yield per hectare

P

u tu ma

yo

BRAZIL

kg/ha/harvest kg/ha/year

harvest/year

Ô E

PERU

Am a

o

zo n

as

0

150
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

Region
5°S

Regions for coca leaf yield survey International boundaries Department boundaries
75°W

300 km

70°W

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

5°S

Putumayo - Caqueta

5°N

oM

1300

7100

ÔÔÔÔÔÔ E E E E E

Río Orin o
R ío

A M
1960 6600 3.3 harvest/year

Ô Ô Ô Ô ÔE E E E E
4.5 harvest/year

ÔÔÔÔ E E E
E

Catatumbo

Sur de Bolivar
R í o A rauc a

co

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.2

NEW FINDINGS ON YIELD AND PRODUCTION

Further to a pilot yield study in 2004, DNE jointly with UNODC contracted an agricultural research company (Agricultural Assessments International Corporation - AAIC) to implement a coca leaf yield survey in Colombia between May 2005 and February 2006. Samples of fresh coca leaf were harvested from 746 coca plots selected among 463 coca fields, and 1,389 coca farmers were interviewed. The objective of the survey was to collect data on the fresh coca leaf yield, the general characteristics of coca cultivation practices, as well as information and data on the processing of fresh coca leaf into coca paste. The survey relied on actual harvest samples, face to face interviews and group discussions with farmers. The averages and proportions used in the calculations of this chapter derived from the field survey, and corresponded to the average and proportions extrapolated to the sampling frame. The basis for the establishment of the sampling frame were about 75,000 hectares of coca fields, interpreted from the coca cultivation survey of 2003 or 2004, depending on the time of the survey by region. From this basis, a total population of about 58,000 farmers involved at the time of the survey in coca cultivation was extrapolated. The total for 2005 has been calculated by combining these averages or proportion and the coca cultivation figures of 85,750 hectares of coca cultivation in 2005. As the coca leaf yield survey did not cover the Amazon region, results obtained from the neighbouring region of Putumayo-Caqueta were used as best estimate for the Amazon region. The Central region defined for the coca cultivation census corresponded to the regions of Sur de Bolivar and Catatumbo in the coca leaf yield survey. 2.2.1 COCA LEAF YIELD AND COCA LEAF PRODUCTION

From the weighing of 746 samples of harvest of fresh coca leaf, the fresh coca leaf yield per harvest averaged 1,360 kg/hectares. The highest regional yield per harvest was found in the region of Sur de Bolivar with an average of 1,960 kg/hectares (the 95% confidence interval ranging from 1,740 kg/hectares to 2,180 kg/hectares), and the lowest yield was found in the Pacific region with an average of 964 kg/hectares (with 95% confidence rate ranging from 900 to 1,020 kg/hectares). The regional averages are presented below. Table 18: Regional average coca leaf yield per harvest by region (from weighing of samples)
Sample size Region Fields Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Meta-Guaviare
Putumayo-Caqueta

Avg Yield per harvest (kg/hectares) 1,960 1,607 1,489 1,444 1,302 1,012 964 1,360

Lowest limit of confidence interval (kg/hectares) 1,740 1,530 1,430 1,330 1,230 910 900 1,340

Highest limit of confidence interval (kg/hectares) 2,180 1,690 1,550 1,550 1,370 1,110 1,020 1,380

Orinoco Catatumbo Pacific All regions

55 45 103 80 50 45 85 463

Plots weighted 55 90 206 80 100 45 170 746

Coefficient of variation (CV in %) 5.7% 2.6% 2.1% 3.8% 2.7% 5.0% 2.9% 1.4%

53

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Figure 7. Regional averages of coca leaf yield per harvest, framed by their confidence interval (kg/hectares)
2,300 2,100 1,900 1,700
1,607 1,960

kg/ha

1,500 1,300 1,100

1,489

1,444 1,302

1,012

900 700 500 Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada MetaGuaviare PutumayoCaqueta Orinoco Catatumbo

964

Pacific

The average coca leaf yield obtained from weighing samples of coca leaf was compared to the farmer’s estimates for the corresponding fields and harvest. In general, average yields obtained from weighing samples were higher than average yields as reported by farmers. Farmers’ tendency to underreport their yields might be a cause for such difference. However considering all data obtained at country level, the results from the two survey-types did not appear to be statistically different. Table 19: Comparison between average yields obtained from weighing of samples and average yields as reported by farmers.
Region Average fresh coca leaf yield from weighing of samples # fields Average (kg/hectares) Average fresh coca leaf yield from interviews # fields Average (kg/hectares)

Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Putumayo-Caqueta Catatumbo Pacific Orinoco Meta-Guaviare All regions

55 45 80 45 85 50 103 463

1,960 1,607 1,444 1,012 964 1,302 1,489 1,360

224 148 295 141 342 248 348 1746

1,606 1,462 1,273 1,100 815 1,365 1,289 1,244

Figure 8. Comparison between average yields obtained from weighing of samples and average yields as reported by farmers.
2.500

2.000

1.500 kg/ha

1.000 1.610 1.610 1.460 1.440 1.960 1.270 1.010 1.100 960

810

1.300

1.490

500

0 Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada PutumayoCaqueta Catatumbo Pacific Orinoco MetaGuaviare

from weighing of samples

from farmers' interviews

54

1360

1290

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.2.2

ANNUAL YIELD

A coca field is harvested several times during the year. In order to estimate the annual yield, it is therefore necessary to know the average number of times the coca fields are harvested. According with farmers reports in the 463 fields from which coca leaf samples were weighted, the average number of harvest per year was 4.5, equivalent to one harvest every 81 days. But important regional differences were found between the highest in Meta-Guaviare reaching 6.6 harvests per year (or every 55 days), and the lowest in the Pacific region with 2.5 harvests per year (or every 146 days). Table 20: Regional average number of annual harvest (from interviews)
Region Number of Interviews5 Average number of harvests in 2004 Coefficient of variation (CV in %)

Meta-Guaviare Orinoco Catatumbo Putumayo-Caqueta Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Pacific Country level

103 50 45 80 55 45 85 463

6.6 5.4 4.5 3.9 3.3 3.4 2.5 4.5

2.1% 4.5% 4.1% 3.4% 4.9% 3.8% 4.1% 2.0%

Figure 9. Regional average annual number of harvest, framed within their confidence intervals
8 7 # harvest per year 6 5 4 3 2 Meta-Guaviare Orinoco Catatumbo PutumayoCaqueta Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Pacific
6.6 5.4 4.5 3.9 3.3 3.4 2.5

The annual regional average yield of fresh coca leaf was calculated by assuming that all harvests during the year were equivalent. The average yield per harvest was multiplied by the average number of harvests. The highest and lowest annual yields estimates were calculated as the highest/lowest range of the 95% confidence interval of the average regional yield, multiplied by the highest/lowest range of the 95% confidence interval of the number of harvests per year. The analysis of the vegetation cover revealed that 21% of the coca fields of the 2005 census were forest in 2004, and therefore less than one year old. From the coca leaf yield survey, it was found that coca field of less than one year old had a yield per harvest of 1,500 kg/ha, while older fields had on average a lower yield per harvest of 1,300 kg/ha. However, the number of harvest per year was lower for new fields than for older fields, respectively averaging 3.6 harvests and 4.5 harvests. In terms of annual coca leaf yields, the weighted average on new fields was 5,700 kg/ha/yr, whereas on old fields it was 6,300 kg/ha/yr.

5

Farmers’ interviews corresponding to the coca fields from which coca leaf samples were weighted

55

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Table 21: Coca leaf yields in old and new fields
From coca leaf yield survey Average Average Number of yield per annual harvests / harvest harvest yr (kg/ha) (kg/ha) 1,300 6,300 4.5 1,500 5,700 3.6 1,400 6,300 4.4 From satellite survey Planted area (ha) 67,404 18,346 85,750

Fields

Number of parcels 679 67 746

Old fields New fields Total

It should be emphasized that the coca leaf yield survey was not designed to estimate annual yield from old and new fields, but rather a unique average per region. In the calculation of the total coca leaf production, it was thus the regional averages for all fields that were used. Would the distinction between old field and new fields have been made, the total coca leaf production would only have been lower by 5%. The annual regional averages were calculated from the regional average yield per harvest and the regional number of harvest per year for the individual observations and taking into account the strata each observation belong too. The annual regional averages were thus the following: Table 22: Calculations for the average regional annual yield of fresh coca leaf (kg/hectares)
Region Avg annual yield kg/hectares/yr Lowest annual yield kg/hectares/yr Highest annual yield kg/hectares/yr

Meta-Guaviare Orinoco Sur de Bolivar PutumayoCaqueta Sierra Nevada Catatumbo Pacific Country level

9,900 7,100 6,600 5,600 5,400 4,600 2,600 6,300

9,200 6,400 5,600 4,900 5,000 4,000 2,300 6,000

10,500 7,900 7,800 6,400 5,900 5,300 2,900 6,500

The mentioned calculations revealed that the highest annual fresh coca leaf yield was reached in Meta-Guaviare and averaged 9,900 kg/hectares/yr (ranging between 9,200 kg/hectares and 10,500 kg/hectares/yr). The lowest annual yield was found in the Pacific region and averaged 2,600 kg/hectares/yr (ranging between 2,300 kg/hectares/yr and 2,900 kg/hectares/yr). Figure 10. Average annual yields of fresh coca leaf framed by their lowest and highest estimates (kg/hectares/yr)
13,000 11,000 9,000 kg/ha/yr 7,000 5,000 3,000 1,000 MetaGuaviare Orinoco Sur de Bolivar PutumayoCaqueta Sierra Nevada Catatumbo Pacific 2,600 9,900

7,100

6,600 5,500 5,400 4,600

56

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

The very high annual yield obtained in Meta-Guaviare was primarily due to the high number of harvests (6.6 per year) rather than to the average yield per harvest (1,489 kg/hectares) that was not the highest of the country. It was not possible to find a single factor in the survey data responsible for such a high number of harvests per year. However, it was interesting to note that farmers from Meta-Guaviare reported that only 25% of their coca fields had been affected by aerial spraying. Aerial spraying rate in the Meta-Guaviare was one of the lowest rate among the seven regions, and much lower than the national average of 48% of coca fields reported to have been affected by aerial spraying.

Coca field in Meta department In Colombia, coca leaves are traded as fresh, whereas in Peru and Bolivia they are traded after having been sun-dried. Therefore, for comparison the Colombian coca leaf yields have to be converted from fresh weight to dry weight. The conversion was done assuming average moisture content of 57%, as found during a survey carried out by UNODC in Peru in 2004. Table 23: Average regional annual yield coca leaf in equivalent of sun-dried leaf (kg/hectares) Region Meta-Guaviare Orinoco Sur de Bolivar Putumayo-Caqueta Sierra Nevada Catatumbo Pacific All regions Sun-dried avg annual yield (kg/hectares) 4,200 3,100 2,800 2,400 2,300 2,000 1,100 2,700

Once converted in equivalent of sun-dried leaf, the coca leaf yields of Peru, Bolivia and Colombian can be more easily compared, although the methodology and the data collection process still differed. The Colombian regional average yields are shown in the graph below. 57

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Figure 11. Annual coca leaf yield, in sun-dried equivalent, from various regions of Colombia, Peru and Bolivia
Colombia, M et a-Guaviare Peru, Apurimac-Ene Colombia, Orinoco Peru, Alt o Huallaga Colombia, Sur de Bolivar Bolivia, Chapare Colombia, Put umayo-Caquet a Colombia, Sierra Nevada Colombia, Cat atumbo Bolivia, Yungas, non-t radit ional areas Peru, La Convención-Lares Peru, Palcazu-Pichis-Pachit ea Peru, Inambari-Tambopat a Colombia, Pacif ic Bolivia, Yungas, t raditional areas Peru, M arañon

4.200 3.627 3.100 2.988 2.800 2.764 2.400 2.300 2.000 1.798 1.457 1.433 1.290 1.000 936 860 500 1.000 1.500 2.000 2.500 3.000 3.500 4.000 4.500

-

Compared to the average annual yield of 6,300 kg/hectares/yr obtained from the weighing of 746 samples, the average annual yield obtained from interviews of 1,389 farmers reporting on 1,746 fields was 9% lower and averaged 5,700 kg/hectares/yr. The lower average annual yield obtained from farmers’ interviews were attributed to farmers’ tendency to under-report their yields. Table 24: Comparison of annual coca leaf yield from weighing of samples and from farmers’ interviews
Region Meta-Guaviare Orinoco Sur de Bolivar Putumayo-Caqueta Sierra Nevada Catatumbo Pacific Country level Average fresh coca leaf yield from weighing of samples # fields Averagee (kg/hectares/yr) 103 9,900 50 7,100 55 6,600 80 5,600 45 5,400 45 4,600 85 2,600 463 6,300 Average fresh coca leaf yield from interviews # fields Average (kg/hectares/yr) 348 8,200 248 7,800 224 5,200 295 4,600 148 5,100 141 5,300 342 1,700 1,746 5,700

Figure 12. Comparison of annual coca leaf yield from weighing of samples and from farmers’ interviews
12.000 10.000 kg/ha/yr 8.000 9.900 6.000 4.000 2.000 0
MetaGuaviare Orinoco Sur de Bolivar PutumayoCaqueta Sierra Nevada Catatumbo

8.200

7.100

7.800

6.600

5.600

5.400

5.200

4.600

5.100

4.600

5.300

Pacific

Avg annual yield from weighing of samples

Avg annual yield from farmer's interviews

58

2.600

1.700

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

During the interviews, the 1,389 farmers were also asked whether or not they had lost part or all of any coca harvest. Overall, 47% of fields were found to have experienced a decrease in yield or a total loss of at least one harvest. The highest percentage of fields with loss of harvest or reduced productivity was found in the Pacific region (94%), while the lowest was found in the Sur de Bolivar region (11%). Table 25: Loss of coca harvest or reduced productivity, as reported by farmers
Region Number of coca fields
% fields with loss of harvest or reduced productivity

Pacific Orinoco Meta-Guaviare Sierra Nevada Catatumbo Putumayo-Caqueta Sur de Bolivar All regions

342 248 348 148 141 295 224 1,746

94% 52% 44% 39% 39% 17% 11% 47%

For the fields that experienced a loss of harvest or reduced productivity, the most often reported cause as aerial spraying (on average 48%). At the regional level however, it is worth noting that in Meta-Guaviare, the most often reported cause was pest (53%), and in the Orinoco region, the most often reported cause was the climate (55%). Table 26: Causes of loss of harvest, as reported by farmers
Region

Putumayo-Caqueta Catatumbo Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Orinoco Meta Guaviare Pacific All regions

Aerial Spraying 62% 96% 89% 76% 18% 25% 58% 48%

Pest and diseases 18% 0.6% 9% 6% 9% 53% 38% 37%

Climate 20% 3% 17% 55% 18% 4% 12%

Other 2% 2% 18% 4% 0.6% 3%

Once their fields have been sprayed, the farmers responded that in 45% of the cases they would just wait for the coca plants to recover, in 20% of the cases they would cut the damaged coca plants, in 12% of the cases they would re-plant their fields, while the remaining 23% adopted for a combination of these solutions.

Coca bush affected by a disease

Coca fields sprayed 59

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Figure 13. Causes of loss of harvest in 2005
120% 100% 80%
62% 96% 89% 76% 58%

60% 40%
25%

20% 0% PutumayoCaqueta Catatumbo Sur de Bolivar Aerial spraying Sierra Nevada Pest

18%

Orinoco

Meta Guaviare

Pacific

Climate

Other

The average annual yield reported for the fields that experienced a loss of harvest was 36% lower than the average annual yield reported for the fields that experienced no loss. On average, farmers reported an annual coca leaf yield of 6,900 kg/hectares/year from fields that experienced no loss of harvest, while they reported an annual average coca leaf yield of 4,300 kg/hectares/year from fields that experienced a loss of harvest. Table 27: Comparison of the average annual coca yield from farmers reporting losing a harvest with farmers reporting no loss of harvest
Region Without any loss % kg/hectares/yr 4,600 83% 6,400 61% 6,000 89% 5,800 61% 8,700 48% 8,700 56% 3,000 6% 53% 6,900 % With loss kg/hectares/yr 4,100 17% 3,700 39% 2,000 11% 3,800 39% 6,900 52% 7,000 44% 1,600 94% 47% 4,300

Putumayo-Caquetá Catatumbo Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Orinoquía Meta Guaviare Pacific All regions

Figure 14. Comparison of the average coca yield from farmers reporting losing a harvest with farmers reporting no loss of harvest
10.000 9.000 8.000 7.000 6.000 5.000 4.000 3.000 2.000 1.000 -

kg/ha

8.700

8.700

6.400

6.000

4.600

4.10 0

5.800

3.70 0

2.00 0

3.80 0

6.90 0

7.00 0

PutumayoCaqueta

Catatumbo

Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada

Orinoquia

Meta Guaviare

Pacific

Without any loss

With loss

Farmers also reported on their use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides. The most often used fertilizer is Triple 15, which 54% of the farmers used on average at the rate of 176 kg every 72 days. Overall, the farmer’s interviews reported the use of 32 different fertilizers. By combining their average quantity used by hectare with the frequency of use and the proportion of farmers reporting their uses, the total quantity of fertilizers used on the 86,000 hectares of coca cultivation in 2005 amounted to 85,258 metric tons and about 9 million litres. 60

3.000

1.60 0

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

As for herbicide, 55% of the farmers reported to use Gramaxone, spreading about 2.7 liters of the product every 76 days. For the total coca cultivation of 86,000 hectares, about 618,254 liters of Gramaxone were spread on the coca fields in 2005. It is also interesting to note that round up and Glyphosate, two products used in the aerial spraying, were also used by farmers. About 129,000 liters were spread by the farmers on their coca fields in 2005. As for pesticides, 25% of the farmers reported to use Tamaron, spreading about 2 liters of the product every 70 days. For the total coca cultivation of 86,000 hectares, about 223,600 liters of Tamaron were spread on the coca fields in 2005. Overall, the farmer’s interviews reported the use of 30 different pesticides. When asked for the main reason for growing coca plants, 55% of the farmers mentioned economic reasons, either mentioning openly the profitability of the coca market or the fact that coca plants and its derivatives were easily marketable. Another 28% claimed they had no other choice, and the remaining 17% stated that coca cultivation was part of the local culture.

Coca plants interspersed with plantain cultivation Table 28: Reasons for cultivating coca in the sample group
Region Profitability Easily marketable No other choice Part of local culture

Putumayo-Caquetá Catatumbo Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Orinoquía Meta Guaviare Pacífico All region

28% 44% 47% 31% 41% 36% 32% 34%

28% 6% 6% 32% 27% 17% 24% 21%

25% 28% 32% 25% 18% 26% 37% 28%

20% 22% 15% 12% 13% 21% 7% 17%

On the other hand, only 9% of the coca farmers reported having received any kind of assistance to stop growing coca plants. Table 29: Assistance to stop growing coca cultivation in the sample group
Region Proportion of farmers who received aid to stop coca cultivation Proportion of farmers who did not receive aid to stop coca cultivation

Putumayo-Caquetá Catatumbo Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Orinoquía Meta Guaviare Pacífico

12% 0% 5% 0% 3% 15% 0%

88% 100% 95% 100% 97% 85% 100%

All regions

9%

91% 61

Annual coca leaf production in Colombia, 2005
75°W
Colombia

70°W

Caribbean Sea

South America
2,900

La Guajira

Atlántico
10°N 10°N

Magdalena Sierra
Río Ma

Nevada Cesar

da

g

PA NA

lena

VENEZUELA
3,900

Sucre Bolívar Córdoba

Río Ca uca

o trat

Río A

Boyacá Caldas
5°N
e ta

Casanare

Pacific Ocean

Risaralda Quindío
45,300

Cundinamarca

Orinoco
ichada Río V

Pacifico

Valle

Tolima Meta Huila
na
258,300

G Río

iare uav

Cauca

Río M

ag d a

le

Meta - Guaviare
Guaviare

oI Rí

a nírid

Nariño

Guainía

85,500

Putumayo - Caqueta Caquetá Putumayo

Río Ca

12,700

Amazonia
Vaupés

quet á

BRAZIL
Amazonas

ECUADOR

P

u tu ma

yo

Annual coca leaf production (metric tons)

PERU

Am a

metric Tons.

Total coca leaf producction
0

o

zo n

as

150
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

300 km

Region
5°S

Regions International boundaries Department boundaries
75°W

70°W

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

5°S

5°N

oM

68,900

Vichada

Río Orin o

A M
Chocó

Catatumbo
Norte de Santander

Antioquia Arauca
89,800

Santander

Sur de Bolivar

R í o A rauc a

co

R ío

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.2.3

COCA LEAF, COCA PASTE AND BASE PRODUCTION

The potential production of fresh coca leaf in Colombia for 2005 was calculated by multiplying the regional average annual yield of fresh coca leaf by the regional area under coca cultivation. The lower and upper estimates were calculated by using the lowest and highest annual regional yields. The potential production of fresh coca leaf was estimated thus estimated at 567,400 mt, within a range of 510,400 mt and 627,200 mt (or +/- 10%). Assuming 57% moisture content, this was equivalent to a total production of 244,000 mt of sun-dried coca leaf.

Table 30: Calculation of the 2005 production of fresh coca leaf in Colombia
Region Coca cultivation (hectares) Annual yield (kg/hectares/year) Production (tons)* % of 2005 total

Meta-Guaviare Sur de Bolivar Putumayo-Caqueta Orinoco Pacific Amazonia6 Catatumbo Sierra Nevada Country level

26,087 13,618 15,260 9,701 17,434 2,261 846 543

9,900 6,600 5,600 7,100 2,600 5,600 4,600 5,400

258,300 89,900 85,500 68,900 45,300 12,700 3,900 2,900 567,400

46% 16% 15% 12% 8% 2% 1% 1% 100%

* Data estimated from the Coca leaf yield Survey DNE-UNODC

Figure 15. Production of fresh coca leaf in Colombia 2005
300,000

250,000

200,000

mt

100,000

258,300

150,000

89,900

68,900

50,000

85,500

45,300

12,700

3,900

MetaGuaviare Sur de Bolivar PutumayoCaqueta Orinoco Pacific Amazonian Catatumbo Sierra Nevada

Due to the high annual yield observed in Meta-Guaviare, the region accounted for 45% of the total production, although it represented only 30% of the total coca cultivation.

6

The coca leaf yield survey was not implemented in the Amazonian region. The coca leaf yield for the Amazonian region was approximated with the coca leaf of the region of Putumayo-Caqueta which has the same environmental characteristics.

2,900

63

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

In Colombia, traditional use of the coca leaf can be considered marginal, and virtually the entire coca leaf production is destined for cocaine production. There are various ways to produce cocaine. The overall process is that leaves are processed into coca paste, then into cocaine base, then into cocaine hydrochloride. The farmers can either sell the coca leaves, or process these leaves into coca paste or base. The last step, the processing of the cocaine base into cocaine hydrochloride is not carried out by farmers but in clandestine laboratories. Coca paste is the first product obtained in the process of alkaloid extraction from coca leaves using sulfuric acid and combustibles. It is then a cocaine sulfate with a high content of organic remnants, pigments, tannin, and other substances. Cocaine base is obtained by dissolving the cocaine sulphate in an acid and adding an oxidant agent (potassium permanganate being the oxidant most often used), then adding a base. The resulting substance is precipitated and filtered. The coca leaf yield survey revealed that 34% of the farmers, representing only 25% of the total coca leaf production, sell directly the coca leaves, without processing them. Another 35% of the farmers, who represent 26% of the total coca leaf production, processed them into coca paste, and the remaining 31% of the farmers, who represent 49% of the total coca leaf production, process their leaves into cocaine base. Table 31: Division of labour among coca producers
Region % of farmers not processing coca leaves % of farmers processing coca leaves into coca paste % of farmers processing coca leaves into cocaine base

Putumayo-Caquetá Catatumbo Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Orinoco Meta Guaviare Pacific All regions

32% 71% 43% 49% 15% 9% 68% 34%

65% 20% 5% 22% 0% 26% 31% 35%

3% 9% 52% 29% 85% 65% 1% 31%

Figure 16. Proportion of farmers processing and not processing coca leaves
90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% PutumayoCaquetá Catatumbo Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Orinoco Meta Guaviare Pacific

% of farmers not producing paste or base

% farmers producing paste

% farmers producing base

During the survey, the farmers who processed their coca leaves were asked about the amount of coca leaves and ingredients used, and the amount of final product obtained. The distinction between paste and base is not easy to draw because the terms are often misused by the farmers themselves. In order to distinguish between these two products, it was decided to refer to cocaine base when the farmers reported the use of permanganate potassium or ammonium for processing their leaves, and coca paste when the farmers did not report the use of these products. 64

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Therefore, it was possible to calculate the average conversion rate of one metric ton of coca leaves into coca paste (1.63 kg) and cocaine base (1.52 kg). In other words, coca paste yielded 93% of cocaine base.

Table 32: Average kg of coca paste or base obtained from one metric ton of coca leaf
Region Number of PAU’s7 process coca leaf Avg kg of coca paste per metric tons of coca leaf Avg kg of cocaine base per metric tons of coca leaf

Putumayo-Caqueta Catatumbo Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Orinoco8 Meta Guaviare Pacific All regions

152 37 107 69 118 285 79 847

1.75 1.39 1.41 1.45 1.53 1.55 1.63

1.74 1.38 1.41 1.45 1.73 1.52 1.46 1.52

Figure 17. Regional average of quantity (kg) of coca paste and base obtained from one metric ton of fresh coca leaf.
2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2
1.75

1.74

1.73

1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0

1.53

1.52

1.55

1.39

1.38

1.41

1.41

1.45

1.45

PutumayoCaquetá

Catatumbo

Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada

Orinoco

0

Meta Guaviare

Pacific

Avg kg of cocaine paste per ton of coca leaf

Avg kg of cocaine base per ton of coca leaf

7

Agriculture Production Unit: an economical unit dedicated to the production or others licit crops under a unique management of a person or a family 8 The Orinoco farmers process only cocaine base.

1.46

65

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

About 27% of the coca leaf production was processed into coca paste. Thus, out of the total production of 567,400 mt of coca leaf, about 151,000 mt tons were processed into coca paste. Using the conversion rate of 1.63 kg of coca paste out of every tons of coca leaf, the total coca paste production from farmers was estimated at 246 mt. This was equivalent to 229 mt of coca base, based on a coca paste to base ratio of 93%. Table 33: Calculation of coca paste production
Region Total leaf production mt 258,300 89,900 85,500 68,900 45,300 12,700 3,900 2,900 567,400 Proportion of farmers producing coca paste % 26% 5% 65% 31% 65% 20% 22% Leaf production processed into coca paste mt 67,200 4,500 55,600 14,000 8,300 800 600 151,000

Meta-Guaviare Sur de Bolivar Putumayo-Caqueta Orinoco Pacific Amazonian Catatumbo Sierra Nevada Country level

The rest of the farmers either processed directly into cocaine base, or sell their production as leaf, corresponding to a total of 416,300 mt. Assuming that the production of coca leaf sell directly by the farmers was processed outside the farm into cocaine base at the same rate as within the farm of 1.52 kg per tons of leaf, the total amount of cocaine base was estimated at 633 mt. Table 34: Calculation of cocaine base production Proportion of farmers producing cocaine base %
65% 52% 3% 85% 1% 3% 9% 29%

Region

Total leaf production mt

Proportion of farmers selling leaf for base processing %
9% 43% 32% 15% 68% 32% 71% 49%

Total leaf production for base processing Mt
191,100 85,400 29,900 68,900 31,300 4,400 3,000 2,300 416,300

Meta-Guaviare Sur de Bolivar Putumayo-Caqueta Orinoco Pacific Amazonia Catatumbo Sierra Nevada Country level

258,300 89,900 85,500 68,900 45,300 12,700 3,900 2,900 567,400

Overall, either produced from coca paste or directly from coca leaves, the total production of cocaine base in Colombia in 2005 was estimated at 862 metric tons. During the interviews, the farmers also reported on their use of Potassium Permanganate, an important precursor for cocaine hydrochloride. The use of Potassium Permanganate is restricted by law. Based on the average quantity of Permanganate used per ton of coca leaf processed and the proportion of farmers reporting its use, it was possible to estimate the total use of Permanganate at the farm-gate level at about 90 tons.

66

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Table 35: Calculation for estimating the quantity of Permanganate used by farmers
Leaf production (mt) 258,300 89,900 85,500 68,900 45,300 12,700 3,900 2,900 567,400 % of farmers using permanganate 6.2% 39.9% 2.1% 29.0% 0.7% 2.1% 5.0% 26.2% Avg use of Permanganate per tons of leaf (kg) 1.4 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.3 1.1 1.4 Total use of Permanganate (mt) 22.4 39.5 2.3 24 0.3 0.3 0.2 1.1 90.1

Region Meta-Guaviare Sur de Bolivar Putumayo-Caqueta Orinoco Pacific Amazonian Catatumbo Sierra Nevada Country level

Processing coca leaves into coca paste

Cutting the coca leaves

Preparing the coca leaves

The coca leaves mixed with gasoline

The coca paste

67

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.2.4

REVISED POTENTIAL COCAINE PRODUCTION

The coca yield survey implemented by UNODC and DNE in 2005 focused on obtaining data on the yield of coca leaf and on the processing by farmers of coca leaf into coca paste or cocaine base. The data on annual coca leaf yield and the conversion rates of coca leaves into coca paste and cocaine base were combined with the annual census estimating coca cultivation to estimate the total productions of coca leaf, coca paste and cocaine base. To estimate cocaine production, UNODC relied on external sources. Indeed, investigating clandestine laboratories was not possible because these laboratories are directly in the hands of narco-traffickers. So far, UNODC did not collect any data to estimate the efficiency of these clandestine laboratories nor on the quantity of cocaine hydrochloride that can be produced from coca paste/base. In addition to the technical difficulties to obtain these data, this kind of survey is also complicated by the existence of several techniques to produce cocaine hydrochloride, and various purity level of the end-product. The UNODC calculation for cocaine production in 2005 relied on its own estimate of cocaine base and on data obtained by the US Operation Breakthrough regarding the conversion rate from cocaine base to cocaine hydrochloride and the purity level of cocaine hydrochloride for conversion into equivalent of pure cocaine production. US Operation Breakthrough mentioned a 1:1 conversion rate from cocaine base to cocaine hydrochloride. However, this was obtained from laboratories especially set up for this kind of survey, and thus this conversion rate is likely to correspond to ideal circumstances not always obtained in reality, especially by farmers. The same source also communicated to UNODC that cocaine base contained about 75% of pure cocaine alkaloid and the cocaine hydrochloride contained about 85% of pure cocaine alkaloid. From this data, UNODC derived a 1:0.9 ratio from cocaine base to cocaine hydrochloride. This ratio of 1:0.9 was deemed to apply better to the cocaine base production which corresponded to cocaine base obtained from farmers not working in ideal conditions. Based on this data, the 862 metric tons of cocaine base were equivalent to 776 metric tons of cocaine hydrochloride or 660 metric tons of pure cocaine. This represented an average pure cocaine yield per hectare of 7.7 kg/hectares. Since 2002, UNODC estimated the cocaine production in Colombia based on the average of the two cultivation figures recorded as of December of the previous year and December of the current year. This average was then multiplied by the estimated yield per hectare. This method enables to take into account that coca fields are harvested more than once in a given year and eradication activities are spread over several months. Therefore, based on an average coca cultivation level of 83,000 hectares, the pure cocaine production in Colombia for 2005 amounted to 640 metric tons. Annual cocaine production figures for previous years relied on estimates of cocaine yield per hectare from external sources (4.7 kg/hectares, Operation Breakthrough), and therefore were not comparable with the 2005 estimate of 7.7 kg/hectares which was based on the results of the first coca leaf yield survey implemented jointly by the Colombian Government and UNODC. Based on the results of the pilot yield study in 2004, which already indicated that cocaine yield could be higher, as well as the findings of the coca yield survey in 2005, which found that farmers reported similar yields for 2004 and 2005, it was concluded that potential cocaine production in 2004 should be revised using the new findings. With the newly established cocaine yield of 7.7 kg/ha, the 2004 cocaine production was revised at 640 metric tons (previous estimate of 390 metric tons). For the 2003 cocaine estimate, the cocaine yield of 5.8 kg/ha reported by the Colombian Government to UNODC Annual Questionnaire was used to revised the cocaine production to 550 metric tons (previous estimate of 440 metric tons).

68

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

The coca leaf yield survey carried out in 2005 jointly by the Colombian government and UNODC helped to better assess the cocaine production in Colombia, and could help to revise previous estimates. It also enabled to understand better why the increasing rate of cocaine seizures reported to UNODC in the recent years did not lead to price rises or any significant decline in cocaine purity in the main consumer markets of the United-States and Europe.

Figure 18. Cocaine production* in Colombia 1995 - 2005 (in metric ton)
800 700 600 500 Metric tons 400 300 200 100 0 Metric tons

1995 230

1996 300

1997 350

1998 435

1999 680

2000 695

2001 827

2002 580

2003 550

2004 640

2005 640

*Production data for 2004 and 2005 is based on new field research.

In 2005, at the global level, the potential cocaine production in Colombia represented 70% of the global potential cocaine production of 910 metric tons.

Table 36: Global potential cocaine production, 1995 – 2005
% Change 20042005 % of 2005 total

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001 60 150 617 827

2002 60 165 580 805

2003 79 155 550 784

2004 107 190 640 937

2005 90 180 640 910

240 215 200 150 70 43 Bolivia 460 435 325 240 175 141 Peru Colombia 230 300 350 435 680 695 930 950 875 825 925 879 Total Source: UNODC, in italic revised figures as of 2005

-16% -5% 0% -3%

10% 20% 70% 100%

69

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Figure 19. Global potential cocaine production, 1995 - 2005

1.000

Colombian production data for 2004 and 2005 is based on new field research.

175 800 460 435 325 240

141 150 165 155

190

180

metric ton

600

400 230 300

680 350 435

640 695 617 580 550

640

200 240 215 200

150 70 43 2000 Colombia 60 2001 Peru 60 2002 79 2003

107 2004

90 2005

0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Bolivia

2.2.5

OPIUM LATEX AND HEROIN PRODUCTION

DIRAN’s previous estimates assumed that Colombian farmers harvested three opium poppy crops per year. Recent US government studies on heroin production showed however that, in Colombia, opium poppy farmers cultivate two crops per year in all growing regions but one (Nariño department). According to these studies, opium poppy fields yield between 13 and 17 kilograms of latex per hectare and per harvest, depending on the growing region. Assuming an average yield of 15 kilograms per hectare, and 2 harvests per year, the total potential opium latex production would be around 59 metric tons. Based on a conversion rate of 24 kg of opium latex for one kilo of pure heroin (US-DEA study, ‘Operation Breakthrough’ conducted in 2001), the total potential heroin production in Colombia would amount to about 2.5 metric tons of heroin in 2005, representing 0.5% of the global heroin production of 472 metric tons9.

Flowers and capsules of opium poppy
9

UNODC World Drug Report 2005

70

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.3 2.3.1

PRICES COCA LEAF, COCA BASE AND COCAINE PRICES

Between 2004 and 2005, coca leaf prices increased by 57% in US$ and by 35% in Colombian Pesos (COP). Average prices have usually been higher in the Pacific region (Nariño department). However, as of December 2005, prices in Nariño decreased and converged towards the national mean of about COP 2,500/kg (US$ 1.1/kg). In Nariño, the decrease in coca leaf prices is also reflected in a decrease in coca paste prices. In Colombia, coca leaf is traded as fresh, whereas in Peru and Bolivia, coca leaf is traded as dried. Converted in equivalent dried coca leaf (assuming a moisture loss of 57% between fresh and sundried coca leaf, from 2004 UNODC coca leaf yield in Peru), coca leaf price in Colombia in 2005 established at US$2.56 /kg, which is comparable to prices of dry-coca leaf in Peru (US$ 2.9/kg) but lower than in Bolivia (US$ 4.4/kg). Table 37: Coca leaf price (‘000 of COP/kg) in some regions of Colombia, 2005
Sample size Weighted national average Putumayo Caquetá Sierra Nevada

Months

Centre

Pacific

January February March April May June July August September October November December Annual Average (COP) Annual Average (US$)

10 8 6 6 6 7 6 5 6 6 7 9 82

1,920 2,070 2,510 2,560 2,410 2,310 2,330 2,640 3,170 2,630 2,670 2,450 2,470 1.1

2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,240 2,400 2,800 2,200 3,000 3,000 3,070 2,560 1.1

2,930 3,200 4,000 4,200 3,600 3,360 3,280 4,160 5,000 4,000 4,200 2,800 3,730 1.6

1,880 1,880 2,020 2,020 2,020 2,020 2,020 2,000 2,320 2,300 2,120 2,240 2,070 0.9

480 800 1,600 1,600 1,600 1,600 1,600 1,600 1,200 1,360 1,680 1,370 0.6

Source: National Monitoring System Supported by UNODC-SIMCI

Most peasants sell coca paste that they themselves produce in small “kitchen” located on the farm. The necessary technical know-how was brought to the farmers during the 90’s by drug-traffickers to facilitate and increase the commercialisation of cocaine Most coca growers sell their production as coca paste (a product the farmers called "pasta básica"). It is therefore a fair proxy indicator of the situation prevailing in the Colombia coca market. But one should take into account that the armed groups that tend to monopolise this trade often imposed their prices and conditions to the farmers. Therefore prices do not always react quickly according to the economic law of supply and demand. Prices of coca paste increased from an average of US$ 810/kg in 2004 to US$ 910/kg in 2005 (+12%). However, during 2004 the Colombian Peso strengthened against the dollar by about 12%, and during 2005 strengthened another 4%. As a result of this appreciation, in local currency (Colombian pesos, COP), prices for coca paste remained virtually unchanged, from COP 2,119,000 in 2004 to COP 2,190,000 in 2005 (- 0.5%). 71

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Looking more closely at the prices trends within the year 2005, it is worth noting the decrease (-14%) between August (US$ 980/kg) and December (US$ 861/kg). As can be noted on the graph, the decrease at the national level can be attributed to the decrease in prices in the Pacific region (Nariño department), and to a lower extent to a decrease in prices in Putumayo-Caqueta. The decrease in prices in Nariño since August 2005 might be attributed to the intense drug control and aerial spraying efforts in this region that hindered its trade. In the absence of traders, prices would have decreased. Balancing the decrease in prices in Nariño, prices of coca paste in the northern region of Sierra Nevada established at a rather high level of about US$1,200 /kg since May 2005 (or about 30% higher than the national average of US$915 during the same period). Reportedly, these high prices in Sierra Nevada would be due to the increase in prices of the various chemicals and precursors necessary to produce the paste, in particular the increase of the prices of gasoline that sometimes comes from Venezuela. Table 38: Monthly coca paste price in Colombia 2005 (in '000 COP/kg)
Months Sample size Weighted national average Meta – Guaviare Pacific PutumayoCaqueta Centre Sierra Nevada

January February March April May June July August September October November December Average (COP) Average (US$/kg)

15 13 14 14 13 14 13 12 13 11 14 12 158

2,122 2,093 2,019 2,154 2,124 2,103 2,163 2,260 2,129 2,115 2,059 1,963 2,119 810

2,300 2,300 2,300 2,400 2,100 2,000 2,300 2,300 2,100 2,100 2,000 2,000 2,183 940

2,067 2,500 2,100 2,175 2,025 1,900 1,900 2,400 2,300 2,200 1,900 1,400 2,072 892

1,700 1,700 1,700 1,700 1,500 1,600 1,600 1,600 1,875 1,675 1,525 1,475 1,638 705

2,166 2,166 2,194 2,194 2,194 2,214 2,217 2,200 2,243 2,100 2,071 2,140 2,175 937

2,380 1,800 1,800 2,300 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,500 2,800 2,800 2,507 1,080

Source: National Monitoring System Supported by UNODC-SIMCI

Figure 20. Monthly coca paste price in Colombia 2005 (in '000 COP/kg)
3,200,000

2,700,000 COL/kg

2,200,000

1,700,000

1,200,000 J-05 F-05 Centre M-05 Pacific A-05 M-05 J-05 J-05 A-05 S-05 O-05 N-05 D-05

Putumayo-Caqueta

Sierra Nevada

Meta-Guaviare

72

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

The collection of prices data and their analysis is complicated by the absence of standard in naming the products, and in the absence of indications on the quality of the products. This is the case for cocaine base and coca paste which can easily be confused. However, the data on cocaine base, albeit less frequently reported than the data on coca paste, confirmed that cocaine base is a more refined product than coca paste, and that both product can be traded. On average, for 2005, prices of cocaine base were 20% higher than the prices of coca paste. Coca paste is the product most often traded by farmers, whereas cocaine base would be produced mainly in clandestine laboratories as an intermediary product to cocaine hydrochloride. Table 39: Monthly cocaine base price in Colombia 2005 (in '000 COP/kg)
Sample size 2 2 2 5 22 9 42 Weighted national average 2,425 2,425 2,650 2,617 2,631 2,443 2,532 1,090 Putumayo Caqueta 2,650 2,650 2,750 2,683 1,150 Sierra Nevada 2,750 2,475 2,800 2,675 1,160 Orinoc o 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,725 2,150 2,295 990 MetaGuaviare 2,700 2,400 2,550 1,110

Months

Centre 2,650 2,900 2,867 2,588 2,751 1,190

Pacific 2,267 2,275 2,271 990

January February March April May June July August September October November December Average (COP/kg) Average (US$/kg)

Figure 21. Comparison of the prices of coca paste and cocaine base in 2005 in US$/kg
1200 1000 US$/kg 800 600 400 200 0 Centre Pacific PutumayoCaqueta Coca paste Sierra Nevada Orinoco Meta-Guaviare 937 1.190 892 990 705 1.150 1.080 1.160 1.110 940

990

Cocaine base

Because of the clandestine nature of the trade, cocaine prices are less easily collected than prices of coca paste or coca leaf. This explains the fewer data available for cocaine prices than for other products. In Colombia, prices of cocaine hydrochloride are collected by DIRAN (the Anti-Narcotics Police), and refer to whole sale prices in the main cities. The purity level was not investigated in this study. 73

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

The graph below presents the annual averages of cocaine prices since 1991. The prices are presented both in Colombian Pesos (COP) and US$ as constant price of 1991 to correct for the inflation. In addition, reported annual aerial spraying of coca cultivation has been plotted on the right axis. As can be hinted from the graph, the analysis of the data revealed a positive correlation between the annual prices of cocaine in Colombian pesos and the annual total of area sprayed ( = 0.92 for constant prices between 1994 and 2005), meaning that in general an increase in area sprayed corresponds to an increase in cocaine prices in Colombian Pesos. However, that relationship cannot be so strongly established for prices of cocaine in US$ ( = 0.19 for constant prices between 1994 and 2005). Table 40: Cocaine HCl price in Colombia 1991 – 2005
Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Source: DIRAN

'000 COP/kg 950 1,020 1,377 1,488 1,232 1,762 1,769 2,101 2,800 3,100 3,599 4,389 4,500 4,600 4,315

US$/kg 1,500 1,500 1,750 1,800 1,350 1,700 1,550 1,472 1,592 1,485 1,571 1,532 1,565 1,713 1,860

Figure 22. Annual average cocaine prices and annual aerial spraying levels, 1991-2005, Colombia
160,000 1,900 140,000 1,700 120,000 '000 COP and US$/kg 100,000 1,300 1,100 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 US$/kg 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 coca fumigated (ha) 1,500

900

700

500

Aspersion

'000 COP/kg

74

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

The data from the monthly survey on prices of the Andean coca market combined with the data from the coca leaf yield survey, enabled to calculate theoretical income from the sale of coca leaf, coca paste and cocaine base. The differences between these incomes give an indication of the value-added given by the farmers to coca paste and cocaine base. The table below shows a definite increase in the value added at each step of the processing. The value-added of cocaine base (+51%), the final product that can be produced by the farmers, also explained why 49% of the coca leaf production was transformed into cocaine base by the farmers. Table 41: Annual income per hectare of coca cultivation for different derivatives of coca leaf
Derivates Annual yield/hectares kg/hectares Average annual price US$/kg Annual income/hectares US$/hectares Value-added from coca leaf %

Coca leaf Coca paste Cocaine base Cocaine hydrochloride

6,300 10.3 9.6 7.7

1.1 910 1,090 1,860

6,930 9,370 10,460 14,320

35% 51% 107%

Figure 23. Theoretical annual income per hectare of coca leaf, coca paste, cocaine base and cocaine hydrochloride
16.000 14.000 12.000
US$/ha

14.320

10.460 9.370 6.930

10.000 8.000 6.000 4.000 2.000 Coca leaf

Coca paste

Cocaine base

Cocaine hydrochloride

Based on the total production of each product sold by the farmers and the respective prices in 2005, the total farm-gate income value resulting from coca cultivation was estimated at about US$ 843 millions. This value does not take into account the farmers production costs, like cost of herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers and labour wages. It should also be noted that 51% of this value (US$ 430 million) is made in the region of Meta-Guaviare, because of its very high annual yield (9,900 kg/hectares) and high proportion of farmers processing cocaine base (65%) Table 42: Value of the production of coca leaf and its derivative at farm-gate level
Product Leaf Paste Base Rounded total farm-gate value kg sold 138,657,000 246,000 428,000 US$/kg 1.1 910 1090 US$ value 152,522,700 223,860,000 466,520,000 843,000,000

The total farm-gate value of production of coca leaf and its derivatives, corresponded to 0.7% the 2005’s GDP of US$ 122 billion according to DANE. In 2005, the total farm-gate value of coca cultivation represented 6% of the agricultural GDP of US$13.8 billions. The coca leaf yield survey also enabled to collect data, through interviews, on the average area of coca cultivation by family. It was found that on average, a family cultivated about 1.25 hectares of coca plants. For a total area under coca cultivation of 86,000 hectares in 2005, the number of family cultivating coca plants was thus estimated at 68,600 families. 75

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Table 43: Number of families involved in coca cultivation in Colombia in 2005
Region Meta-Guaviare Sur de Bolivar PutumayoCaqueta Orinoco Pacific Amazonia Catatumbo Sierra Nevada All regions Coca cultivation (hectares) 25,950 14,780 13,950 9,710 17,640 2,330 850 540 85,750 person per family 5.7 4.7 4.2 4.4 5.1 4.2 4.8 5.1 hectares per family 1.3 2.1 0.7 3.7 1.2 0.7 1.3 1.5 1.25 # family* 20,000 7,000 19,900 2,600 14,700 3,300 700 400 68,600 # person* 114,000 32,900 83,580 11,440 74,970 13,860 3,360 2,040 336,150

* Data estimated from the Coca leaf yield Survey DNE-UNODC

Thus, US$ 843 million divided among 68,600 families represented an annual gross income per family of US$ 12,300. For a total of 336,150 persons in these families, this was equivalent to an annual per capita gross income of US$2,500. The gross income value, which do not take into account the production costs, like costs of herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers and labour wages. 2.3.2 OPIUM LATEX AND HEROIN PRICES

In Colombia, opium is harvested in the form of latex. This is unlike in Asia where opium is harvest as a denser gum. In Colombia, opium poppy cultivation is confined to the mountainous areas because it requires low temperatures at some stages in the growth cycle. Opium poppy is therefore not found in association with coca cultivation which is rather located on the low land. The graph of the monthly average of opium latex prices in the Sur de Bolivar and Pacific regions indicates an increase in price starting since May 2005. This trend is also noticeable in the increase of the annual averages: between 2004 and 2005, opium latex prices went up from US$ 164/kg to US$ 220/kg, equivalent to an increase of 34%. A similar trend can be noted in the annual average prices of heroin: between 2004 and 2005, heroin prices went up from US$ 7,635/kg to US$ 9,050/kg, equivalent to an increase of 19%. This increase corresponded to a decrease in reported opium poppy cultivation, from 5,000 hectares in 2004 to 2,000 hectares in 2005. Table 44: Monthly opium latex prices in Colombia, 2001 – 2005 (‘000 COP/kg)
Months January February March April May June July August September October November December Annual Average (‘000 COP/kg) Annual Average US$/Kg 2001 700 638 638 638 638 650 288 2002 638 638 638 548 583 493 517 431 339 347 457 447 506 211 2003 288 440 393 424 519 476 480 531 534 469 389 389 444 154 2004 450 400 400 400 450 450 400 400 450 450 500 450 433 164 2005 560 560 512 516 400 450 480 525 546 614 576 666 534 230

Sources: DIRAN, PDA, SIMCI (extrapolation in italic)

76

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Figure 24. Opium latex prices in Colombia, 2001 – 2005 by month (‘000 COP/kg and US$/kg)
800 350

700

300

600 250 500 '000 COL/kg US$/kg 200 400 150 300 100 200 50

100

0 Jul-01

Jan-02 Jul-02 Jan-03 Jul-03 COP/kg Jan-04 US$/kg Jul-04 Jan-05 Jul-05 Jan-06

Source: UNODC/SIMCI

Table 45:

Heroin prices in Colombia 2003 - 2005 by month
2003 Month '000 COP/kg 14,500 14,333 15,250 15,000 17,500 17,500 17,650 15,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 16,561 US$/kg 5,160 4,978 5,169 5,056 5,983 6,034 6,259 5,212 6,283 6,294 5,740 2004 '000 COP/kg 21,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 21,000 21,000 18,000 18,000 20,800 22,000 23,000 22,000 20,067 US$/kg 7,639 6,623 6,740 6,819 7,722 7,730 6,784 6,927 8,148 8,525 9,090 9,123 7,635 2005 '000 COP/kg 20,100 20,100 23,000 20,500 19,146 21,250 19,500 19,389 21,051 US$/kg 8,499 8,590 9,833 8,794 7,867 9,271 8,553 8,508 9,050

January February March April May June July August September October November December Annual Average
Source: DIRAN

77

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.4

REPORTED AERIAL SPRAYING AND MANUAL ERADICATION

The Colombian anti-drugs strategy includes a number of measures ranging from aerial spraying, to force or voluntary manual eradication, including alternative development and crops substitution programmes. UNODC did not participate in or supervise the spraying activities. All data were received directly from DIRAN. By far the most important is the spraying programme carried out by the Antinarcotics Police – DIRAN. This is realized through aerial spraying with a mixture of products called Round up – composed of an herbicide called glyphosate - and a surfactant called Cosmoflux and other additives. In late 2002, the National Narcotics Council approved an herbicide concentration of 2.5 litres per hectare for opium poppy and 10.4 litres per hectare for coca, with a view to increasing the spraying effectiveness rate, which was estimated as being 90%. However, it should be kept in mind that the chemical mixture has effect over the leaves and not over the roots or the soil, and therefore the bush can be subject of a prune operation at about one feet over the ground to obtain a renewal of the bush in about six months. The Illicit Crop Eradication Programme foresees an Environmental Management Plan and environmental auditing, as well as periodic verifications on the ground of the effectiveness of spraying activities and their environmental impact. The Ministry of Environment certified in July 2004 to the “Eradication of Illicit Crops Programme by Aerial Spraying with Glyphosate”, the observance of the environmental obligations imposed in the Management Plan. Reports from DIRAN showed that, for the fifth consecutive time, spraying activities reached record level in 2005. The DIRAN sprayed a total of 138,775 hectares, representing an increase of 2% compared to last year aerial spraying levels. For the first time in 2005, spraying activities were implemented in the departments of Chocó, Cundinamarca and Valle. Regarding the estimates on spraying area, it is important to differentiate between the accumulated sprayed area reported here – which is the sum of areas during a given time period (calculated by multiplying the length of flight lines by their width), and the effective sprayed area, which disregards the overlap between adjacent sprayed bands and areas sprayed several times in the same calendar year. Once coca fields are sprayed, it takes approximately six to eight months to recover productive crops when the bushes are pruned or replanted. However, when heavy rain occurs or bushes are washed by the farmers immediately after the spraying, the loss in coca leaf can be reduced and the crop recovered quickly. Therefore, coca cultivation sprayed during the first semester of 2005 had time to re-establish a vegetation cover that could be detected on the satellite images. The sustainability of the eradication efforts depends to a large extent on the real alternatives open to the farmers and to the displacement of the cultivation into new and more remote areas of the country (balloon effect). In addition to spraying, the Army reported the manual eradication of 31,287 hectares of coca cultivation, a record compared to previous levels of 6,234 hectares in 2004 and 4,011 hectares in 2003. The total of both types of eradication (spraying and manual) amounted to 170,062 hectares in 2005. The Government also reported the aerial spraying of 1,624 hectares and the manual eradication of 484 hectares of opium poppy cultivation. The total of both types of eradication (spraying and manual) amounted to 2,108 hectares.

78

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Table 46: Reported aerial spraying and manual eradication of coca cultivation 2005 (ha) by month
Aspersión Aérea
Department Manual Eradication Total aerial spraying and manual eradication

Jan Amazonas Antioquia Arauca Atlántico Bolívar Boyacá Caldas Caqueta Cauca Cesar Chocó Córdoba Cundinamarca Guajira Guaviare Huila Magdalena Meta Nariño N. Santander Putumayo Santander Tolima Valle Vaupés Vichada Total 425 2.143 5 -

Feb 163 296 340 -

Mar 198 71 -

Apr 768 925 1.090 501 -

May 1.506 43 388 324 169 -

Jun 31 305 -

Jul 538 974 261 1.117 -

Aug 161 504 179 -

Sep 899 594 -

Oct 430 184 59 -

Nov Dec 512 132 978 93 -

Total 16.833 2.584 6.409 925 1.090 5.452 3.292 425 1.767 43 572 11.865 383 14.453 899 2.042 5 340 -

216 1677 226 3 188 5233 575 84 1383 14 225 2498 1221 1681 1888 15 1180 738 5712 2209 1.543 1145 8 1551 74 31.287

216 18.510 2.810 3 6.597 6.158 1.665 5.536 4.675 14 650 4.265 1.264 2.253 13.753 15 1.563 15.191 63.342 3.108 13.306 3.187 8 1.556 340 74 170.062

7.003 6.490 2.411

1.839 745 3.436 2.405

1.775 784

268 1.597 337

3.197 2.988 2.813

1.455 910

2.833 1.604 1.504 628 152 -

4.170 1.203 -

9.953 14.289 21.327 9.881

684 1.023 57.630

2.193 2.420 1.337 3.236 2.577 11.763

15.723 18.076 24.410 16.150 11.306 9.928 6.266 10.087 7.847 7.636 6.676 4.671 138.775

Table 47: Reported aerial spraying and manual eradication of opium poppy cultivation 2005 (ha) by month
Aspersión Aérea Department Ene Nariño Huila Tolima Cauca Cesar Caqueta Guajira Total Feb 406 406 Mar 16 197 161 20 20 414 Abr 100 15 116 May 25 20 45 Jun 33 8 41 Jul 171 50 225 446 Ago 78 78 Sep 0 Oct 36 36 Nov 0 Dic 29 12 41 Total 626 454 399 69 56 20 1.624
Total aerial spraying Manual Eradication and manual eradication

484 484

1.110 454 399 69 56 20 0 2.108

79

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Aerial Spraying and manual eradication of coca cultivation in Colombia, by department and year (in ha)
Sources Department Guaviare Meta Caqueta Putumayo Vichada Antioquia Cordoba Vaupés Cauca N. Santander Nariño Santander Boyacá Bolivar Arauca Magdalena Guajira Caldas Valle Chocó Cundinamarca Sub-total Manual eradication Total eradication Net cultivation 1995 21394 2471 0 50 23915 23915
51000

Environmental Audit of the National Narcotics Bureau 1996 14425 2524 537 85 684 264 18519 18519
67000

Antinarcotics Police Department 1999 17376 2296 15656 4980 91 2713 43111 43111
160000

1997 30192 6725 4370 574 41861 41861
79000

1998 37081 5920 18433 3949 297 349 66029 66029
102000

2000 8241 1345 9172 13508 6259 2950 9584 6442 470 102 58073 58073
163000

2001 7477 3251 17252 32506 2820 741 10308 8216 11581 94153 1745 95898
145000

2002 7207 1496 18567 71891 3321 734 9186 17962 130364 2752 133116
102000

2003 37493 6973 1 8342 9835 550 1308 13822 36910 5 4783 11734 132817 4011 136828
86000

2004 30892 3888 16276 17524 1446 11048 756 1811 5686 31307 1855 6456 5336 1632 449 190 136552 6,234 142,786
80000

2005 11865 14453 5452 11763 16833 1767 340 3292 899 57630 2042 925 6409 2584 383 572 1090 5 425 43 138775 31287 170062
86000

Table 48: Aerial spraying and manual eradication of opium poppy cultivation in Colombia, by department and year (in ha)
Sources Department Antioquia Caqueta Cauca Cesar Guajira Huila Nariño Tolima Sub-total Manual eradication Total eradication Net cultivation Environmental Audit of the National Narcotics Bureau 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 53 305 177 1,383 1,549 3,466 3,466 5,200 120 123 713 371 715 4,843 6,885 6,885 4,900 383 50 91 2,175 4,290 6,988 6,988 6,600 1,452 2,901 2,901 7,400 650 50 749 828 125 1,426 313 5,557 8,249 8,249 6,500 Antinarcotics Police Department 2000 1,601 423 2,421 1,090 3,720 9,254 9,254 6,500 2001 387 426 429 630 194 2,066 319 2,385 4,300 2002 401 236 548 545 788 854 3,371 213 3,584 4,200 2003 550 1,004 75 391 725 250 2,995 271 3,266 4,200 2004 39 435 505 18 913 342 810 3,061 804 3,865 4,000 2005 20 69 56 0 454 626 399 1,624 497 2,121 2,000

81

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

As can be seen from the graph below, the reduction in coca cultivation noted between 2001 and 2004, corresponded mainly to an increased and sustained spraying efforts. As aerial spraying stabilized after 2002 around 130,000 hectares, coca cultivation kept decreasing, although to a lower rate between 2003 and 2004. However, coca cultivation increased between 2004 and 2005, while spraying activities rose. Figure 25. Comparison of net coca cultivation and accumulated sprayed areas (hectares).
180,000 160,000 140,000 120,000 hectares 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Coca cultivation

Aerial spraying

Sources: DIRAN, UNODC/SIMCI

When analysed at the department level, the data showed that the level of aerial spraying in 2001 had a statistically significant impact on the reduction of coca cultivation between 2001 and 2002. There was a significant negative correlation (-0.83) between the amount of aerial spraying in 2001 and the change in the extent of coca cultivation between 2001 and 2002. For the following years, aerial spraying had an impact in the total reduction of coca cultivation. The impact became statistically less significant in later years due to heavy replanting.

Manual eradication in Sierra La Macarena National Park.

82

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

2.5

REPORTED SEIZURE

UNODC was not involved in the collection of data on seizures and destruction of laboratories. However they are reproduced here for information and because they provide interesting indications as to the existence of possible trafficking corridors and allow for a better understanding of the dynamics that surrounds the overall drug business. According to DNE, a total of 1953 illegal laboratories were destroyed in 2005. Out of these, a total of 1,786 corresponded to laboratories processing coca paste or coca base, 151 to processing cocaine hydrochloride, 16 permanganate of potassium, and 6 of heroin. Compared to 2004, it represented an increase of 5% in the number of illegal laboratories destroyed, demonstrating the high intensity of the actions taken by the Colombian Government against illicit drug production and coca cultivation. Figure 26. Number of illegal laboratories destroyed and coca cultivation, 1997-2005
180,000 160,000 140,000 Coca cultivation in ha 120,000 1,500 100,000 80,000 1,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 Coca Cultiation in ha Illegal laboratories destroyed 1997 392 1998 323 1999 317 2000 647 2001 1,574 2002 1,448 2003 1,489 2004 1,865 2005 1,953 500 2,000 Illegal laboratories destroyed 2,500

79,500 102,000 160,119 163,289 144,807 102,071 86,000 80,000 86,000

Coca Cultiation in ha

Illegal laboratories destroyed

Source: Drug Observatory, DNE

Illegal laboratory (photo DIRAN)

83

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

The distribution by department of the number of illegal laboratories destroyed and which were processing derivatives of coca leaves (coca paste/base and cocaine hydrochloride), also highlighted the department of Nariño as the most important illicit drug production centre in Colombia, as was the case in 2004. In the department of Guaviare, which accounts for 10% of the total coca cultivation, the number of coca paste/base laboratories destroyed increased from 4 in 2004 to 131 in 2005. Table 49: Illegal laboratories destroyed and coca cultivation in 2005
Coca paste or base laboratories destroyed 388 303 170 131 125 110 90 65 54 53 51 41 37 36 27 27 26 15 15 13 6 1 1 1 0 1786 Cocaine Laboratories destroyed 41 11 10 4 4 11 1 2 14 8 11 2 0 1 0 6 4 4 2 0 6 0 0 0 9 151 Heroin laboratories destroyed 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Permanganate of potassium laboratories destroyed 6 4 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 16

Department Nariño Antioquia Magdalena Guaviare Putumayo Cauca Caqueta Meta Valle N. Santander Santander Bolivar Vichada Cordoba Choco Cundinamarca Boyaca Arauca La Guajira Amazonas Caldas Bogota Huila Tolima Cesar Total Source: DNE

84

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

The data reported by DNE also showed an increase of 16% in cocaine seizure, from 149 metric tons in 2004 to 173 metric tons in 2005. Table 50: Reported seizures of illicit drugs
Drug Coca seeds Coca leaf Coca paste Coca base Basuco Cocaine hydrochloride Opium seed Opium latex Morphine Heroin Raw cannabis Cannabis resin Cannabis seeds unit kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg kg unit 2000 1,678 897,911 118 9,771 802 89,856 17 17 91 564 75,465 na 121,350 na 47 788 86,610 0 11,310 22,750 2001 98,916 583,165 53 16,572 1,225 57,140 43 4 2002 27,752 638,000 974 22,615 1,706 95,278 124 110 21 775 76,998 3,5 510 175,382 24 5,042 19,494 2003 173,141 688,691 2,368 27,103 2,988 113,142 87 27 78 629 108,942 57 39 763 151,163 567,638 1,218 37,046 2,321 149,297 2004 2005 301,444 682,010 2,651 106,491 19,607 173,265 11 1,632 93 745 150,795

Synthetic drugs Source: Drug Observatory, DNE

Out of the 173 metric tons of cocaine seized in 2005, 96 metric tons or 56% were seized by the Colombian Navy on sea or in seaports. This suggests that most of the shipment of cocaine seizure took place by sea. The Pacific route continued to be the most important route for trafficking (63% of the maritime seizure in 2005). Table 51: Reported seizures of cocaine in the Pacific and Atlantic routes, 2002 – 2005
2002 Pacific 2003 2004 2005

43,435

47,137

Atlantic 16,065 23,157 Total seized by 59,500 70,294 sea Total seizures 95,278 113,142 % of seizures 62% 62% seized on sea Source: Colombian Navy, Intelligence Division

46,128 30,928 77,056 149,297 52%

61,042 35,856 96,898 173,265 56%

Figure 27. Reported seizures of cocaine in the Pacific and Atlantic routes, 2002 - 2005
70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 kg 30,000 43,435 20,000 10,000 2002 2003 Pacific Atlantic 2004 2005 61,042 30,928 35,856

47,137

86

16,065

23,157

46,128

Drug seizures by department and by drug type, Colombia 2005
75°W 70°W La Guajira 75°W 70°W La Guajira

Caribbean Sea

Caribbean Sea

Atlántico
10°N 10°N

31000 Cesar Magdalena Sucre

10°N

Bolívar
19000

Sucre Bolívar

Magdalena Cesar

PA NA

VENEZUELA

PA NA

VENEZUELA

Córdoba Norte de Santander 80000 Antioquia Caldas

Córdoba
41600

Chocó

Chocó

Norte de Santander

Santander Boyacá

Arauca Antioquia Casanare
5°N

Santander Caldas Boyacá

Arauca Casanare
5°N 5°S 0° 5°N 10°N 5°S 0°

5°N

Quindío Valle Tolima Meta

26500

37700

Pacific Ocean

Pacific Ocean
Valle

5°N

Cundinamarca

Vichada

Vichada

Meta

Tolima Cauca Huila 254000 Nariño Vaupés

Guainía

Guainía
33800

Guaviare 100000

Cauca Nariño

Huila
17700

Guaviare

38000

Putumayo Amazonas

ECUADOR

Caquetá

Putumayo

Caquetá

Vaupés

Amazonas

ECUADOR BRAZIL
Reported coca base and cocaine seizures in 2005 by department

Reported coca leaf seizure in 2005 by department

BRAZIL

PERU
20,000 kg
Cocaine base Cocaine

PERU

130,000 kg 20,000 kg
5°S

20,000 kg

Coca cultivation 2005 75°W

70°W

5°S

5°S

75°W Coca cultivation 2005

70°W

75°W

70°W

75°W

70°W La Guajira

Caribbean Sea
La Guajira Magdalena
10°N 10°N 10°N

Caribbean Sea

Atlántico

Cesar

Cesar Magdalena Sucre

PA

VENEZUELA
NA
Sucre Córdoba Bolívar Norte de Santander Santander 73 Chocó Cundinamarca Caldas Boyacá Arauca

PA

VENEZUELA

NA

Córdoba

Bolívar Norte de Santander

Antioquia

13201 Chocó Antioquia Caldas Santander Boyacá

Arauca Casanare

Casanare
5°N

5°N

Vichada

5°N

Pacific Ocean
98 Cauca

482 Valle Tolima Meta Huila Guainía

Pacific Ocean

11492 Valle Tolima 41900 Guainía Meta Vichada

33197 Nariño Guaviare Nariño Putumayo

Huila

Guaviare

Caquetá

Putumayo Vaupés
0° 0°

Vaupés Caquetá

ECUADOR

Amazonas

ECUADOR
Amazonas

Reported heroin seizure in 2005 by department

BRAZIL
Reported cannabis seizure PERU in 2005 by department

BRAZIL
Reported cannabis seizure in 2004 by department

PERU

100 kg
Possible opium poppy growing area 75°W

20,000 kg
70°W
5°S 5°S

20,000 kg
75°W 70°W

Source: Government of Colombia - National monitoring system supported by UNODC, for drug seizures: Colombia Drug Observatory DNE. The boundaries and names shown and the designations used in this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations

5°S

10°N

A M

A M A M

A M

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Table 52: Reported seizure of illicit drugs in 2005
Department Amazonas Antioquia Arauca Atlantico Bogota Bolivar Boyaca Caldas Caqueta Casanare Cauca Cesar Choco Cordoba Cundinamarca Guainia Guaviare Huila La Guajira Magdalena Meta Nariño Putumayo Quindio Risaralda San Andres Santander Sucre Tolima Uraba Valle del Cauca Vaupes Vichada N. de Santander Grand Total 26,501 15,156 285 6 6 5,022 1,900 603 16,391 850 1,453 710 40,880 9 484 59 1,063 0 2,864 1,226 70 3,512 1,332 718 1,587 100,017 3,777 4,380 31,056 17,137 37,761 1,777 466 72 1,430 253,702 25,943 2,595 111 13,759 4,866 42 320 690 55 20 75 3 25 60 49,790 4,738 6 11 9,670 4,292 206 8,381 220 84 575 275 474 75,183 505 Coca leaf Kg Galon 715 550 Cocaine paste Kg 37 579 Galon Cocaine base Kg 46 13,549 344 37 1 576 1,074 64 17,663 0 684 29 258 2,375 270 49 3,965 4,382 467 5,161 2,870 1,065 33 130 6 55 1,279 258 2,515 0 605 37 11 48 16 2 13 27 0 13,176 9 3,089 0 827 0 0 8 3,727 3,207 1,560 15 745 1,632 180 1 2,836 150,795 1,411 133 2,210 11,161 1,260 33,835 108 8 70 6,268 2,350 1,346 5,697 226 37,704 165 2 20 98 4 200 875 1,281 275 1 9 11 54 1,565 114 1 171 187 6,026 475 2,707 530 665 165 715 5,883 356 Galon Basuco Kg 1 1,070 3 17 81 17 6 60 2 2 62 4 4 33 376 Cocaine Kg 56 10,533 118 8,767 3,701 19,309 771 570 1,289 2 5,126 1,313 541 2,147 8,300 1,885 56 482 0 15 3,913 12 1 33 2,585 100 128 660 1 18 28 0 2,989 50 13 53 8 Galon Heroin Kg Latex Kg Galon Cannabis Kg 11 13,157 9 1,344 22 2,305 54 1,235 26 13 33,197 261 7,114 418 11,470 5 15 349 3,883 14,242 193 666 24 2,290 2,419 223 6,811 362 3,895 44 41,901

4,814 54,746

682,010 42,211 2,651

25 106,491 82,200

19,607 173,265 16,893

Source: Drug Observatory, DNE

88

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

3 METHODOLOGY
3.1 COCA CULTIVATION

The monitoring of coca cultivation in Colombia is based on the interpretation of various types of satellite images. For the 2005 census, the project analyzed a total of 68 LANDSAT images, 6 ASTER and 11 SPOT-4 images, captured between September 2005 and March 2006. The images cover the whole national territory (excluding the islands of San Andres and Providence) equivalent to 1,142,000 square km. In September 2004, the Institute of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences of the University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna (Austria), conducted a technical evaluation of the methodology developed for the assessment of coca cultivation. The Institute concluded that the methodology is appropriate and commended the work of the remote sensing team performing the interpretation of the satellite images. The Institute also made some recommendations that will be addressed during the next survey, in particular the use of aerial photography for quality control. The project staff is working in the development of a decision tree for the interpretation of coca crops in satellite images with the support of the BOKU University. This task follows two steps: the first one is the identification of the different factors that determine the interpretation of the coca fields in a selected test area (Meta-Guaviare). The second step is the design of a model of decision tree with the data obtained in the first step for the development of models in each region. The estimation of the total area under coca cultivation in Colombia in 2005 is the result of the following steps: 1) Identification and acquisition of satellite images The survey relied mostly on LandSat 7 ETM+ images and to a lesser extent on ASTER and SPOT- 4 images. Table 53: Satellite images used for the 2005 survey in Colombia
SENSORS LandSat 7 ETM+ ASTER SPOT 4 Total TOTAL AREA (KM²) 721,803 19,812 37,634 779,249 IN % OF TOTAL 92.6 2.5 4.8 100

One of the major difficulties in data acquisition is the frequent cloud cover over the Colombian territory. Therefore, satellite with a frequent revisit and a continuous recording of the area were favoured. The relatively low prices of LandSat 7 ETM+ and ASTER images also contributed to their larger selection than SPOT images. LandSat 7 ETM+ data are collected in 6 spectral bands of 30 meter spatial resolution and an additional panchromatic band of 15 meter spatial resolution. The satellite has a 16-day repeat cycle, which enhances the chance for cloud free images. The swath width of 185 km is appropriate for regional studies. The project identified suitable images by consulting frequently the on-line catalogue of available LandSat 7 images at the US Geological Survey. As of May 2003, the Scan Line Corrector (SLC) of the LandSat 7 ETM+ instrument failed. This malfunction is leading to gaps in the image, gradually diminishing towards the centre of a scene. The assessment of coca cultivation under these gaps (without information) is described in the below section on correction. For future surveys gap-filled products or LandSat 5 data may be used, if available. 89

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

ASTER images consist of 14 spectral bands with a spatial resolution ranging from 15 to 90 meters. The monitoring of vegetation covers relies mostly on the spectral bands 1, 2 and 3 with a pixel size of 15 meters. The swath width of 60 Km requires the acquisition of more images than with LandSat 7 ETM+ to cover equivalent area. About 500 ASTER images would be needed to cover the entire country. SPOT 4 has a spatial resolution of 20 meter and a swath width of 60 km. About 500 SPOT images would be necessary to cover the entire country. 2) Spatial Information Data Base -BIE- (http://200.71.33.136:81/SIMCI/index.html) The BIE is an infrastructure of spatial data that aims to guarantee the knowledge and access of anyone to the spatial information gathered by SIMCI, framed into the recommendations of the United Nations Seventh Regional Cartographic Conference for the Americas, held in New York in September 1999. The BIE is divided into five sections: Satellite Data, Thematic Cartography, Altimetry Cartography, Illicit Crops Spatial Data and Documents. It may be consulted at the web page of UNODC Colombia shown in the last page of this report. Homepage of the BIE on-line catalogue

Screen shot of BIE catalogue metadata available on UNODC Web page

90

Satellite images used for the Colombian coca cultivation survey 2005
75°W
Colombia

70°W

Caribbean Sea
La Guajira
South America
100106
311005

210106

Atlántico
10°N

Magdalena Cesar
10°N
160206 270705

Río Ma

Sucre

da

g

PA NA

len a
181205

VENEZUELA

Córdoba
150306

Río Ca uca

Río A

o trat

270905

071105

190106

Boyacá
eta

Caldas
5°N

Casanare

Pacific Ocean

Risaralda
100106

Cundinamarca
ichada Río V
291205
010905

Quindío Tolima Meta
271205 301105

270905

Valle
090705

160206

301105 081005
271205 301105 301105

G Río

iare uav

na

180206

040905

Huila
ag d a

Cauca
231105

le

160206 021205 160206 120106 301105

291205

Río M

a nírid oI Rí

031005

301105 060206

Guainía

40905 021205

Guaviare
291205 060206 111205

231105 120106 180206 231105

Nariño
091205 231105 280805

Caquetá Putumayo
Río Ca
120106 011005

Vaupés

quet á

BRAZIL
Amazonas

ECUADOR

utu

ma 220905 yo
011005

011005

Satellite types
Aster LandSat SPOT
ddmmyy

PERU
Rí o Ama zo na s
150
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

Acquisition date Coca cultivation 2005 International boundaries Department boundaries
0 300 km

5°S

75°W

70°W

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

5°S

5°N

oM

291205

Vichada

Río O rin o

M

A

131005

Bolívar

271205

Norte de Santander
131005
071105

200206
251105

060206 060206
271205

Antioquia Santander

Arauca
R í o A rauc a

Chocó

co

R ío

P

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

3) Image pre-processing Geo-referencing In order to use image datasets in conjunction with other spatial data available (e.g. digital elevation model), it is necessary to align the image data to the same map coordinate system. The satellite images are geo-referenced on the basis of mosaics built with geo-referenced images with the less cloud coverage used in previous census and the Digital Terrain Model –DTM- from the Space Shuttle Radar Mission of USA. During its revision of the methodology, the Institute of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences of the BOKU University of Vienna (Austria) recommended to ortho-rectify the images with detailed Digital Elevation Model to increase the geometric accuracy. . Radiometric and spatial enhancements To improve the visual and supervised interpretation process, various radiometric enhancements and filter techniques are applied to enhance the contrast of the image. Figure 28. Example of radiometric enhancement

To enhance the spatial characteristics of an image various filters that modified the value of a pixel using the values of surrounding pixels, were used. Figure 29. Example of spatial enhancement

92

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Band combinations To allow an easy interpretation of the displayed image, it is possible to assign which band is displayed with which colour. 4) Digital land cover classification of land use and vegetation One of the difficulties for an automatic or supervised classification of vegetation in Colombia is the absence of well defined crop calendar. Most crops, including coca, are cultivated throughout the year. This makes it difficult to separate coca from other crops based on phenological differences. The automatic land cover classification is not used to detect coca cultivation, but rather to study broadly the various land cover present on an image. That study helps to identify the areas where coca cultivation can be interpreted visually later on (Chuvieco, Basic Principles of Spatial Teledetection, 1990). The project performed a supervised classification, where training areas represent the features to be mapped in advance and class signatures are calculated. Each pixel is then assigned to a land cover class depending on an algorithm. In this case, based on the maximum likelihood algorithm, 18 land cover classes are classified within each image: primary forest and rainforest, secondary forest and shrubs, grassland and shrubs, water bodies, sand banks, clouds and shadows, roads, urban and populated areas, inundated areas, rock outcrops, bare soils, crops, other. Figure 30. ASTER image and corresponding land cover classification

5) Visual interpretation of the coca fields The classification of coca fields relies on the visual interpretation of satellite images. The detection is based on the spectral characteristics, the patterns and the surroundings of the fields. The class ‘coca’ can be considered to be composed of bare soils and small rows of bushes (see figure 31). No distinction is made between the different phenological stages of coca bushes. The interpreter verifies the coca crops based on spectral characteristics, texture, shape, size of the fields and contextual information, like information from previous surveys and geographic information on spraying. The result of training is a set of signatures. Each signature corresponds to a class and is used with a decision rule to assign the pixels to a class. Coca fields are digitized on screen with the help of semi-automatic software tools (e.g. pixel seeding). Small polygons of less than 0.25 hectares (2 or 3 LandSat 7 pixels) are deleted because the interpretation is not enough reliable due to the coarse spatial resolution of the sensor.

93

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Coca fields detected during a verification flight

Figure 31. Picture of coca fields and corresponding interpretation on the satellite image

94

Study area distributed by region and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005
75°W
Colombia

70°W

Caribbean Sea
La Guajira

South America

Barranquilla
Atlántico

Cartagena
10°N

SIERRA NEVADA
Cesar
10°N

Magdalena
Río Ma

da

g

PA NA

lena

VENEZUELA
CATATUMBO
Norte de Santander

Sucre Córdoba

Río Ca uca

o trat Río A

Antioquia Caldas

Vichada
oM

5°N

Pacific Ocean
Valle

Risaralda Quindío Tolima

Cundinamarca

Bogotá

^

ichada Río V

Meta

Río

re avia Gu

Cali
Huila
na

VICHADA GUAINIA VAUPES

Cauca

ag d a

le

Neiva San José

Tumaco

CAUCA NARIÑO VALLE
Nariño

Popayán

Río M

ida nír oI Rí

Florencia

GUAVIARE META
Guaviare

Guainía

Pasto

Mitú

PUTUMAYO CAQUETA
Putumayo

Río

Caquetá Vaupés
Caqu e

BRAZIL
AMAZONAS
Amazonas

ECUADOR

utu ma

yo

Areas of interpretation
Coca cultivation 2005 Study areas for the annual survey Boundaries of IGAC 1:100.000 sheets International boundaries Department boundaries

PERU
Rí o Ama zo n
0

as

150
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

300 km

Leticia

5°S

75°W

70°W

Sources: for coca cultivation Government of Colombia - National monitoring system supported by UNODC; for boundaries of 1:100.000 sheets IGAC The boundaries and names shown and the designations used in this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations

5°S

5°N

CUNDINAMARCA CALDAS BOYACA

e ta

Boyacá

Casanare

Río Orino

M

A
CHOCO
Chocó

Bolívar

Cucutá Arauca
Arauca

ANTIOQUIA SUR DE BOLIVAR

ARAUCA
Santander

Puerto
R í o A rauca Carreño

Medellín

co

R ío

P

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Coca fields are digitized on screen. For this purpose a software tool called ‘pixel seeding’ is used to delineate the fields. This means that pixels are grouped together automatically by the software if their spectral value is similar. The similarity threshold for grouping pixels is determined by the interpreter. In addition, aerial photos taken by the Antinarcotics police (DIRAN), recording of aerial spraying path and coca polygons interpreted for the census of previous years are also used to facilitate the interpretation, as well as the information supplied by different government and UN agencies. The interpretation process relies on the profound knowledge of the area by the interpreter. This knowledge is gained through many years of experience analysing satellite images and frequent over-flights. Interpreters have several years of experience with the project.

Visually interpreted coca fields (in green contour) on an ASTER image

6) Verification flights Verification flights are required for correcting and improving the initial interpretation. The verification is based on direct visual inspection of the ground from a plane. Paper maps are used for orientation and as a data base for verification. In addition to visual inspection from the aircraft, a video camera and a digital camera combined with GPS was used for documentation. The preliminary interpretation results are edited and corrected with the verification findings.

96

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Inside the cockpit during a verification flight

Digital camera mounted with GPS unit

7) Accuracy assessment The assessment of the accuracy of the interpretation results is part of a quality control. The accuracy assessment has two aspects: a geometric accuracy which is the accuracy of the interpreted boundaries (or size) of land cover units and a thematic accuracy which measures the reliability of the identification of land cover classes. Currently the images are geo-referenced on the basis of ground control points extracted from the adjusted mosaics build by the project. In this case, for LandSat 7 ETM+ images a maximum positional deviation of the order of 1/10 of elevation difference can occur. During its revision of the methodology, the Institute of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences of Vienna (Austria) recommended to ortho-rectify the images with detailed Digital Elevation Model to increase the geometric accuracy to below 1.5 pixels. Thematic accuracy is usually specified in terms of error matrix, giving frequency (probability) of misclassification between different classes. The compilation of the error matrix must be based on a representative, unbiased sample of reference data. The collection of reference data is difficult as 97

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

access to the ground is not possible due to security reasons. Reference data have been obtained through the use of high-resolution MDIS images provided by NAS, geo-referenced records of flying paths taken during the spraying actions (DELNORTE) and photographs taken from a portable digital camera on board small aircraft. In 2003, from a sample of 144 reference points, the overall thematic accuracy was estimated at about 89% (number of correctly interpreted polygons over total number of polygons checked). This calculation was not updated, but a similar level of accuracy can be considered for the results of the 2005 survey. Although the thematic accuracy is a good indicator of the quality of the interpretation, it does not provide for a range of the results, and therefore it cannot be used to correct the results. Following the recommendations of the Institute of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences of Vienna (Austria), the project is currently developing an accuracy assessment method relying on aerial photography as surrogate ground data that might provide for such a bias-correction factor. 8) Corrections Following the interpretation process, a number of corrections are applied to account for the effects of spraying activities before or after image acquisition, for missing image information due to clouds or gaps (SLC-off) and for differences in acquisition date of the images with respect to the census cut of date of 31 December. These corrections are necessary to improve the final statistics. 9) Correction for spraying As part of the illicit crop eradication program, coca fields are sprayed from aircraft. The spraying lines are automatically recorded. After transforming the coordinates into the coordinate system of the satellite images, a buffer is calculated depending on the type of the plane and the recorded spraying line. The buffer is placed over the coca interpretation. Corrections are then performed depending on the date of image acquisition and on the date of spraying. Coca areas are ignored if they have been identified in images acquired before spraying, except for an estimated survival rate of 10%.

Coca fields are represented in cyan, spraying lines in yellow

98

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

10) Corrections for cloud cover and gaps in LandSat 7 images (SLC-off) Clouds and shadows are delineated during the land cover classification process. In a first step, buffers of one kilometre width around the clouds are calculated. The coca cultivation area within this buffer is measured. By comparison with the previous survey, trends for coca cultivation are calculated for the buffer area. This trend is used to estimate recent area under the clouds from corresponding area in the previous survey. Old coca fields under clouds or gaps are preserved in position and size, when trends indicate an increase in the surroundings areas. In the 2005 survey, the corrections for the gaps of the LandSat 7 scenes were treated like clouds. The only difference is in a buffer of 300 meter instead of 1000 meter for the clouds. The definition of the buffer is based on experience in both cases. 11) Corrections for differences in acquisition dates of images The satellite image only reflects the cultivation at their acquisition date. A correction factor should be applied to get the estimates at the cut-off date of 31st December. A monthly coca rate of increase or decrease is calculated from the difference in coca cultivation between images acquired over the same area at different dates. This rate is then applied to the initial interpretation for the number of months separating the acquisition date and the cut off date of 31 December. Table 54: Corrections applied in 2005 Area (in hectares)
Initial results Correction for spraying Correction for cloud cover and LandSat 7 gaps (SLC-off) Correction for difference in acquisition dates of images Final results 76,053 2,315 6,362 1,020 85,750

% of initial result
88.7 2.7 7.4 1.2 100

3.2

OPIUM POPPY CULTIVATION

In August 2004, the project conducted a test for the detection and measurement of opium poppy fields from high-resolution satellite imagery over a small area of 121 square km. Unlike in some Asian countries where most of the illicit opium poppy cultivation takes place, opium poppy cultivation in Colombia does not have a fixed calendar and can be grown throughout the year. This means that at any time, opium poppy fields can be found at various phenological stages. This characteristic prevents the determination of a non-ambiguous spectral signature for opium poppy on a high resolution image. It also complicates the establishment of annual estimates that would require frequent monitoring. Opium poppy being cultivated on relatively small fields of less than one hectare, their detection requires the use of satellite images of a ground resolution finer than 5 meter. These high-resolution satellites images are available commercially, but their high cost prevents the establishment of a census survey of opium poppy cultivation in Colombia. The total area to be surveyed for opium poppy cultivation in Colombia would amount to 27,000 square km, or the equivalent of 221 highresolution images of 11x11 km. Considering these constrains, the project, with the support of the Institute of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences of Vienna (Austria), is developing a methodology that would combine the use of high-resolution satellite images on a sample basis, complemented with frequent overflights for the non-ambiguous identification of opium poppy cultivation. Up to now, the opium poppy estimates are based on aerial reconnaissance flights by the Antinarcotics Police (DIRAN). These flights were carried out two or three times during the year on 99

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

a small aircraft. The observer on board recorded the GPS coordinates of observable poppy fields and estimated visually the field area. 3.3 YIELD AND PRODUCTION

This chapter presents an overview of the methodological design of the Coca Yield Survey conducted in 2005 in Colombia. The survey was implemented jointly by the Colombian Narcotic Directorate, DNE and UNODC, and carried out by an agricultural research company (the Agricultural Assessments International Corporation - AAIC). During the survey, samples of coca harvest were weighted from 746 coca parcels selected randomly among 423 coca fields selected randomly, and 1389 coca farmers were interviewed. The methodology was designed by a multidisciplinary team composed of the representatives of the DNE, AAIC and the UNODC Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme through its experts in Colombia and in Vienna. This national survey followed a UNODC’s pilot coca yield survey that took place in October 2004 in 120 fields of three municipalities of Guaviare department, and the interviews of 55 coca farmers. The survey to assess the coca yield in Colombia is a Multistage Stratified Area Frame Probability Sampling Design. This chapter explains the construction of the sampling frame and its stratification, the determination of the sample size and the sample selection process, the data collection and the estimation process. The objective of the survey was to collect information and data on the coca leaf yield, the general characteristics of coca cultivation practices, as well as the processing by farmers of coca leaf into coca paste. The survey relied on actual harvest samples, face to face interviews and group discussions with farmers. The survey was implemented over the coca growing areas of Colombia. For the purpose of this survey, the Colombian departments were grouped into 7 regions. The survey took place in May 2005, October 2005, and February 2006 according to the regions. The following table presents the regions and the time they were surveyed: Table 55: Regions considered for the Coca Leaf Yield Survey
Region Departments Period of survey

Putumayo-Caqueta Catatumbo Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Pacific Orinoco Meta-Guaviare

Putumayo, Caqueta Norte de Santander Bolivar, Antioquia, Cordoba, Boyaca Magdalena, Guajira Nariño, Cauca, Choco, Valle Arauca, Vichada Meta, Guaviare

May 2005 May 2005 May 2005 October 2005 February 2006 February 2006 February 2006

The map on the next page shows the regional grouping, the location of the sampling frame and the sample areas. For the purpose of this survey, estimates were obtained separately for each region. The seven regional groupings constituted seven sampling domains. The sample size (discussed in details in a section below) within each region was calculated in order to be representative of each region.

100

Sample selection for yield survey by regions, 2005
75°W
Colombia

70°W

Caribbean Sea

La Guajira

South America

Barranquilla
Atlántico Magdalena Bolívar
Río M

N.Santander

Sierra Nevada
Cesar

Detail of sample grid in Catatumbo region Sampling grid Cultivation Density
(ha/km²)

Cartagena
10°N

1 2 3

da

PA

le n a

NA

Córdoba

Sucre

VENEZUELA
Norte de Santander

Cucutá

Catatumbo
Chocó Antioquia
Río C a uca
to tra

Arauca

R ío A

Sur de Bolivar

Orinoco

Arauca

Puerto
R í o A rauc a Carreño

Medellín

Santander Boyacá

5°N

Pacific Ocean
Valle

Risaralda Quindío Tolima

Cundinamarca

Bogotá
Meta

Río V

ichada

Orinoco

Río

re av ia Gu

Cali
na

ag d

Cauca

a

le

Neiva San José
oI Rí

a nírid

Popayán
Tumaco

Huila Nariño

Río M

Meta - Guaviare
Guaviare Caquetá

Guainía

Florencia

Pasto

Mitú

Puerto Asís

Putumayo - Caqueta
Putumayo
Río Ca
qu et á

Vaupés

P

ECUADOR

u tu ma

yo

Amazonas

BRAZIL

Sample locations
Region

PERU

Regions
0

Am

az

o

on

as

Coca cultivation 2005 International boundaries Department boundaries
5°S

150
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

300 km

Leticia

75°W

70°W

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

5°S

5°N

Pacífico

Caldas

oM

e ta

Casanare

Vichada

Río Orin o

co

10°N

Sample locations

ag

M
A
R ío

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Sampling frame As in any survey, the quality of the data collected from the sample surveys depends to a large extent on the quality of the sampling frame from which the sample is to be selected. The sampling frame for the estimation of the coca leaf yield was constructed according to the principles of the Area Sampling Frame methodology. The basis for the construction of the frame was the coca fields interpreted during 2003 census for Putumayo-Caqueta, Catatumbo, Sur de Bolivar (which were surveyed in May 2004, at a time when the 2004 census was not yet available) and the 2004 census for the remaining regions (Sierra Nevada, Pacific, Orinoco, Meta-Guaviare). The frame was limited to areas where coca fields could be found. Within that limit, the frame was divided in a collection of one sq km grids. The table below shows the number of grids constituting the sampling frame, the number of coca fields within each region, and the area under coca cultivation in each region. Table 56: Sampling frame for the Coca Leaf Yield Survey Region Putumayo-Caqueta Catatumbo Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Pacific Orinoco Meta-Guaviare All Regions Stratification Most surveys estimating crop production are based on stratified multistage cluster designs. Stratification divides the units in the population into mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive subgroups or strata. Separate samples are then independently selected from each stratum. The main purpose of stratification is to improve the precision of the survey estimates. Therefore, the construction of the strata should be such that units in the same stratum are as homogeneous as possible and units in different strata area as heterogeneous as possible with respect to one or more characteristics of interest to the survey. Based on agricultural literature, experience and field knowledge, but also the mere availability of data at the national level, the agricultural and ecological variables that have been considered for stratification are: the climate, the slope and the altitude. These three variables were combined and used as the basis for the stratification of the sampling frame. The information for these three characteristics was obtained from digital maps: The climate map, the slope map and the altitude map. Number of 1 sq km grid 6,268 2,353 3,966 462 13,442 5,751 24,428 56,670 Number of coca fields 10,569 6,518 7,119 1,239 10,765 3,033 16,174 55,417 Coca cultivation (hectares)10 10,886 3,055 10,106 1,262 15,420 6,244 28,509 75,482

10

Areas used for extrapolation of the samples to calculate yields per region.

102

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Graph: overlaying climate, slope and altitude maps
Climate Slope

Altitude

Resulting classification

Display of variables considered in the stratification of the sampling frame The maps featuring these three characteristics were overlaid to produce a total of 69 different classes over the entire collection of grids. This number of classes was considered too large to be used as the basis for stratification. Indeed, if on the one hand the gain obtained from the stratification is to reduce the variance as the number of strata increased, on the other hand, the constraint of the sample size within each strata (in theory a minimum of two sample elements by stratum in order to be able to calculate their variance) calls for a limited number of strata in order to facilitate the implementation of the survey and reduce its cost. Therefore, it was decided to simplify the initial classification map and reduced it to fifteen basic strata. Sub-Stratification. Not all fifteen basic strata were present in each domain with coca cultivation. Furthermore, in order to improve the sample efficiency and to take advantage of the geographic similarities, some strata were combined with others. However, the original classifications were always retained while performing the sample selection process to ensure a suitable representation of the entire stratum. Implicit Stratification. Within each explicit stratum, a technique known as implicit stratification is often used in selecting the Primary Sample Units (PSU’s). Prior to the sample selection, all PSU’s in an explicit stratum are sorted with respect to one or more variables that are known to have a high correlation with the variable of interest. In this survey, the area under coca cultivation, available for every PSU in the stratum has been used. A systematic sample of PSU’s is then selected controlled by the area 103

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

under coca cultivation of the sub-strata. Implicit stratification guarantees that the sample of PSU’s will be spread across the categories of the stratification variables, and thus optimized the sample selection. Sample Size and sampling allocation The sample size was decided taking into account the desired precision of the estimates, the constraint of verification of all steps of the survey, the necessity to obtain estimates at the regional level, and, last but not least, the financial resources available. The precision of an estimate is measured by its standard error. The degree of precision required for the coca yield was set at about +/- 10% of the true value with a 95 per cent probability that it contains the true value. A thorough verification process at every steps of the implementation of the survey guarantees the quality of the data collected and the confidence of the estimates generated. That is why it is important to keep the sample size to a reasonable limit so that adequate verification can be done within the budget limits. Another aspect to be considered at the time of the sample size determination is that the sample has to be representative for each regional grouping. The financial resources available were the ultimate constraints dictating a limit of 746 different parcels from 423 fields to be studied over seven regions of Colombia. Sample allocations were determined by averaging the results obtained from the methods described below. According to statistical literature, this is a satisfactory compromise (Cochran, 1977) 1 2 3 4 Proportional allocation based on the total area under coca cultivation by region; Equal distribution of the total sample among the seven regions; Coca fields square root. The method that distributes the sample proportional to the square root of the number of coca fields has also been considered; Optimum allocation. The optimum allocation, which distributes the sample proportionally to the product of the coca area standard deviation by the number of the fields, was also studied.

The following table shows the resulting final allocation of the sample by region. Table 57: Sample allocation by region
Region Number of grids selected Number of coca fields selected Number of parcels selected

Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Meta-Guaviare Putumayo-Caqueta Orinoco Catatumbo Pacific All regions

55 45 103 40 50 45 85 423

55 45 103 40 50 45 85 423

55 90 206 80 100 45 170 746

104

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Sampling selection The sampling approach used to estimate the coca leaf production in Colombia relied on a Multistage Stratified Area Frame Probability Sampling Design. It is “Stratified” because the samples were draw from the stratified sampling frame. Within each region, independent samples were drawn for each stratum. It is “Multistage” because a three-stage sampling process was used. The Primary Sampling Units are the one-sq-km grids containing at least one coca field from the 2004 census. The coca fields contained within each grid constitute the Secondary Sampling units. The Third Sampling units are the collection of rectangles or trapezoids of about 5 sq meters randomly selected within the chosen fields. It is “Probabilistic” because each possible sample of grids, each possible sample of coca fields and each possible coca parcel has a known probability of selection greater than zero. The selection probability of the grid (the Primary Sampling Unites) is proportional to the extent of coca area under cultivation within the grid. Furthermore, the selection probabilities of the coca fields (the Secondary Sampling Units) were proportional to the size of the coca fields. Selection of the Primary Sampling Units –PSUThe Primary Sampling Units (PSU’s), or one-sq-km grids, were systematically selected using a Probability Proportional to Size (PPS) approach. PPS sampling is a technique that employs auxiliary data to increase the precision of survey estimates. In this survey, the auxiliary data was the size of the area under coca cultivation in each grid. PPS sampling yields unequal probabilities of selection for PSU’s, based on the area under cultivation in the grid. In other words, the grids with the largest area of coca cultivation are more likely to be selected than the grids with fewer amount of coca cultivation. The grids were systematically selected in order to ensure the geographical distribution of the sample through the region. Practically, for each region, the grids were ordered from West to East and then North to South. The first grid was randomly selected, and subsequent grids were chosen at systematic intervals, thus ensuring that the sample is not concentrated in an area of the region. Selection of the Secondary Sampling Units –SSUFor each grid included in the first stage sampling, only one coca field, or Secondary Sampling Unit (SSU), was then selected. The field was selected based on the location of the fields according to the survey census. Within a grid, the selection probabilities of the coca fields were proportional to the size of the coca fields. In other words, the largest fields had a higher probability of being selected than the smaller fields. In addition, only coca fields being harvested at the time of the visit of the surveyors were considered within the selection process. This ensured that immature coca fields were not selected. Harvesting of immature coca fields would have lead to an under-estimate of the yield, as the coca leaves gained weight until the day of harvest. Selection of the Third Sampling Units –TSUThe parcels were selected by relying on random numbers and the selection followed the instructions laid down in the Guidelines for Yield Assessment of Opium Gum and Coca Leaf, UNODC. Depending on whether coca plants are grown in parallel rows or diverging rows, the plot they occupied was rectangular or trapezoid. Once the sample area of the parcel has been measure, the leaves are harvested from them in the same way that they are harvested from the whole field. The fresh weight of all the leaves from the sample is determined.

105

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

200 paces

120 mts

Sampled parcels in parallel rows

Sampled parcels in diverging rows

In the regions of Putumayo-Caqueta, Catatumbo and Sur de Bolivar, only one parcel of 5 sq meters was randomly selected. However, in order to reduce the bias due to the uncertainty about the exact boundaries of the parcel, it was decided in Sierra Nevada to double the number of Third Sampling Units and increase the area from 5 to 7 sq meters. In order to minimize the bias due to factors such as non-response, not found, non-accessible, notready-for-harvesting, and already- sprayed, each grid of the initial sample was accompanied by two alternative grids. The alternative grids were randomly selected using the same criteria as the initial grid. It was necessary to replace 47 grids out of 423 initially selected. Of the 47 replaced grids, 12 were in Putumayo-Caqueta (out of a sample of 80 grids), 9 were in the region of Catatumbo (out of a sample of 45 grids), and 17 were in Sur de Bolivarthe central region (out of a sample of 55) and 9 in Sierra Nevada (out of a sample of 45).

106

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Sampling weights Sampling weights are always needed to compensate for unequal probabilities of selection. The weights are used in the estimation of the total population values, and in the calculation of standard errors. The sampling approach used to estimate the average coca leaf yield by the actual harvest test was a multistage stratified area probability sampling design. Sample selection was carried out within strata. The units selected at the first stage with PPS, know in the survey literature as Primary Sampling Units or PSU’s (grids), were constructed on the basis of complete enumeration of areas identified in the coca bush census. The units selected at the second stage with PPS within each selected PSU are referred to as Secondary Sampling Units or SSU’s (fields), and units selected randomly at the third stage are referred to as the Third Sampling Units or TSU’s (parcels). In the case of multistage designs, the base weights reflect the probability of selection at each stage. In general, the base weight of a sampled unit is the reciprocal of its probability of selection for inclusion in the sample. Under this scheme of sampling with PPS of sampling units, the coca leaf yield estimation at the h-th stratum is calculated as the simple arithmetic mean of all the actual harvested parcels within the stratum. Therefore, in order to calculate the leaf yield for a region, the simple arithmetic means in the strata should be weighted by their area under coca cultivation.
Determining the area of the parcel to be harvested
1.Variable Estimationby Stratum n n 1 h ˆ 1 h ˆ Yh = Y = nh α =1 hα nh α =1 where : ˆ Yh = Variable Estimationat theh − th stratum ( h = 1,2,3,..., H ); H = Number of Stratainther − thregion; nh = First stage sample sizeof PSU ' s (Grids ) intheh − th stratum; yhα f yhα f ˆ = Yhα = p1hα p2 hα f phα f = Variableestimation at theα − th PSU (α = 1,2,3,..., nh ) at the h − th stratum; yhα = Samplevalueat theα − th PSU ; yhα f = Samplevalueat the f − thcoca field ( SSU ); AChα f AChα AChα f = phα f = p1hα p2 hα f = ACh AChα ACh = Selection probability of the f − thcoca field at the α − th PSU of theh − th stratum; Y AChα p1hα = hα = = First stage selection probability at theα − th PSU Yh ACh of theh − th stratum; Yhα = Total var iable populationat theα − th PSU of the h − th stratum; A h Yh = Y = Total var iable populationat theh − th stratum (α = 1,2,3, ..., Ah ); α =1 hα Ah = Number of PSU ' sinthe populationof theh − th stratum; AChα = Areaunder coca cultivation at theα − th PSU of theh − th stratuminthet − th year ; ACh = Areaunder cocacultivationof the h − th stratuminthet − th year ; p2 hα f = yhα f Yhα = AChα f AChα = Second stage selection probabilities at the f − th field n n yhα f yhα 1 h 1 h = = phα nh α =1 p1hα p2 hα f nh α =1 yhα f phα f ,

of the _ α − th PSU at theh − th stratum; AChα f = Areaunder cocacultivation at the f − th field of theα _ th PSU at theh − th stratumin thet − th year . 2.Variable Estimationby Re gion ˆ Yr = Hr ˆ Y , h =1 h

where : ˆ Yr = Variableestimationof ther − th region ( h = 1,2,3,..., H r ); H r = Number of stratainther − thregion.

3. Adjustment of Variable Estimationof the Field ( whereactual harvest or crop − cutting was performed ) by Stratum ˆ Yh n n ˆ simciYt y n n h Yr 1 1 h simciYt yhα f 1 h simciYt ˆ 1 h hα f ˆ ˆ = = Yhα = Y , A Yh = n α =1 Y ˆ ˆ ˆ nh α =1 Y nh α =1 Y nh α =1 A1 hα phα f phα f 1 h r r h donde : ˆ A Yh = Adjustment of var iableestimationof the field ( whereactual harvest 1 or crop − cutting was performed ) at theh − th stratum ;
simciYt

= Areaunder cocacultivationaccording to SIMCI censusinthet − th year ;

ˆ A1Yhα = Adjustment of var iableestimationof the field ( whereactual harvest or crop − cutting was performed ) at theα − th PSU intheh − th stratum ; 4. Adjustment of Variable Estimationof the Field ( whereactual harvest or crop − cutting was performed ) by Re gion Hr ˆ ˆ A Yr = h =1 A Yh , 1 1 donde : ˆ A Yr = Adjustment of var iableestimationof the field ( whereactual harvest 1 or crop − cutting was performed ) at ther − thregion.

The formulas shown in the right text boxes in the following three pages were used in the process of estimation of the aggregated values for the different variables investigated in this survey 107

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Harvesting the coca leaves
5. Adjustment of Variable Estimation of the Field ( where actual harvest or crop − cutting was performed ) for all the Re gions R ˆ ˆ Y = Y , A T A r r =1 1 1 donde : ˆ Y = Adjustment of var iable estimation of the field ( where actual harvest A T 1 or crop − cutting was performed ) for all the Re gions (r = 1, 2,3,..., R); R = Number of regions. 6. Adjustment of Variable Estimation of the CAF ' s Clusters by Stratum
Uc u =1

yhα cu = 1 nh
nh

1 ˆ A2Yh = nh

simciYt ˆ Yr α =1

nh

mc phα f

α =1

simciYt yhα c 1 = ˆ phα f nh Yr

nh

α =1

simciYt ˆ 1 Yhα c ˆ nh Yr

nh

α =1

A2 hα

ˆ Y ,

Weight of the fresh leaves from the sample.

donde : ˆ A2Yh = Adjustment of var iable estimation of the CAF ' s clusters of the h − th stratum;
Uc

yhα c =

u =1

yhα cu mc

= Variable mean at the c − th CAF ' s cluster ;

mc = Number of CAF ' s at the c − th CAF ' s cluster ; ˆ Y = Adjustment of var iable estimation of the CAF '
A2 hα

s clusters at the α − th PSU of the h − th stratum.

7. Adjustment of Variable Estimation of CAF ' s Clusters by Re gion
A2 T

ˆ Y =

R r =1

A2 r

ˆ Y,

where : ˆ A2Yr = Adjustment of var iable estimation of the CAF ' s clusters of the r − th Re gion. 8. Adjustment of Variable Estimation of CAF ' s Clusters for all the Re gions
A2 T

ˆ Y =

R r =1

A2 r

ˆ Y,

Putumayo-Caqueta, Domain definition and segmentation.

where : ˆ A2YT = Adjustment of var iable estimation of the CAF ' s clusters for all the Re gions. 9. Variance of the Adjustment for theVariable Estimation of the Field ( where actual harvest or crop − cutting was performed ) by Stratum
nh

ˆ var( A1Yh ) =

1 nh

α =1

ˆ ˆ ( A1Yhα − A1Yh ) 2 nh − 1 ,

where : ˆ var( A!Yh ) = Variance of the adjustment for the var iable estimation of the Field ( where actual harvest crop − cutting was performed ) at the h − th stratum.

10. Variance of the Adjustment for theVariable Estimation of the CAF ' s Clusters by Stratum
nh

1 ˆ var( A2Yh ) = nh

α =1

ˆ ˆ ( AYhα − A2Yh )2 nh − 1 ,

donde : ˆ var( A2Yh ) = Variance of the adjustment for the var iable estimation of the CAF ' s cluster at the h − th stratum.

Collection and identification of grids 1 sq kilometre

11. Variance of the Adjustment of theVariable Estimation of the Field ( where the actual harvest or crop − cutting was performed ) by Re gion ˆ var( F1Yr ) =
Hr h =1

ˆ var( F1Yh ),

where : ˆ var( F!Yr ) = Variance of the adjustment of the var iable estimation of the field ( where the actual harvest or crop − cutting was performed ) at the r − th region

108

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Coca fields identified during Census 2003
15 Coca Leaf Yield per Hectare ( Ha) rhαfp = yhαfp Ahαfp 10000,

where : rhαfp = Coca leaf yield ( Kg / Ha) at the p − th parcel (TSU ) of the f − th field ( SSU ) of the α − th grid ( PSU ) at the h − th stratum; yhαfp = Coca leaf weight ( Kg ) at the p − th parcel (TSU ) of the f − th field ( SSU ) of the α − th grid ( PSU ) of the h − th stratum; Ahαfp = Area ( m 2 ) of the p − th parcel (TSU ) of the f − th field SSU of the α − th grid ( PSU ) of the h − th stratum; 10000 = Conversion factor from m 2 to Ha. 16 Simple Arithmetic Mean of the Coca Leaf Yield by Stratum
nh m f

rh =

α =1 f =1

rhαfp ,

nh mα p f

donde : rh = Simple arithmetic mean of the coca leaf yield ( Kg / Ha) at the h − th stratum; nh = Number of PSU ' s in the sample at the h − th stratum; ma = Number of SSU ' s per PSU in the sec ond stage sample;

Final sampling frame and sample selection. squares in red are the randomly selected grids
Región Santa Marta Localización Grillas de Muestreo por Estrato
CONVENCIONES
Grillas de Muestre o
Opcion 1

p f = Number of TSU ' s per SSU in the third stage sample. 17 Weighted Mean of the Coca Leaf Yield ( Kg / Ha) by Re gion Rg =
H

Wh rh ,
h =1

where : Rg = Weighted mean of the coca leaf yield ( Kg / Ha) at the g − th region; Wh = Population weights at the h − th stratum.

Estratos Muestreo
Estrato1 Estrato13

Dibulla

18 Weighted RT =
G g =1

Mean of the Coca Leaf Yield ( Kg / Ha ) for All the Re gions

#

Santa Marta

Guachaca

Mingueo

W r rr ,

where : R T = Weighted W g = Population
Ciénaga

mean of the coca leaf yield ( Kg / Ha ) for all the regions ; weights at the g − th region . Mean of the Coca Leaf Yield by Stratum

19 Variance

of the Simple Arithmetic
n hp hp = 1

( r h α fp − r h ) 2 ,

var( r h ) = (1 − f h ) where : var( r h ) = Variance f h = Sampling

n hp ( n hp − 1)

of the simple arithmetic

mean of the coca leaf yield

at the h − th stratum ; fraction at the h − th stratum

12 Variance of the Adjustment of the Variable Estimation of the Field ( where the actual harvest or crop − cutting was performed ) for All the Re gions ˆ var( F1 YT ) =
R r =1

=

Number of fields ( SSU ' s ) in the sample at the h − th stratum ; Number of fields ( SSU ' S ) in the population at the h − th stratum of actual harvest ( crop − cutting ) parcels at the h − th stratum of the Mean of the Coca Leaf Yield by Re gion

n hp = Number 20 Weighted var( R g ) =
H

ˆ var( F1 Yr ),

Variance W
h =1 2 h

where : ˆ var( F! YT ) = Variance of the adjustment of the var iable estimation of the field ( where the actual harvest or crop − cutting was performed ) for all the regions.

var( r h ), var iance of the mean of the coca leaf yield

var( R g ) = Weighted at the g − th region . 21 Weighted var( R T ) =
R

13 .Variance of the Adjustment of the Variable Estimation of the CAF ' s Clusters by Re gion ˆ var( F2 Yr ) =
Hr h =1

Variance
r =1

of the Mean of the Coca Leaf Yield for All the Re gions

W g2 var( R g ), var iance of the mean of the coca leaf

ˆ var(F2 Yh ),

var( R T ) = Weighted

where : ˆ var( F2 Yr ) = Variance of the adjustment of the var iable estimation of the CAF ' s clusters at the r − th region. 14 Variance of the Adjustment of the Variable Estimation of the CAF ' s Clusters for all the Re gions ˆ var( F2 YT ) =
R r =1

yield for all the regions .

ˆ var( F2 Yr ),

where : ˆ var( F2 YT ) = Variance of the adjustment of the var iable estimation of the CAF ' s clusters for all the regions.

109

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Flowchart of Coca Leaf Yield Survey

3.4

PRICES

Prices of coca leaves and its derivates in the production stage were collected in monthly basis by SIMCI/UNODC through interviews of farmers in all growing regions except Orinoco. This data is complemented with the data collected by PCI in Putumayo, Catatumbo, Córdoba, Boyacá and Antioquia. DIRAN also collect data on prices through intelligence methods for cocaine, coca base and heroin in several cities of the country.

110

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

4 ANNEX
- Corrections by departments (in hectares) - Satellite images coverage with acquisition date - Coca cultivation over Indigenous Territories

111

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Annex: Correction for cloud cover, gaps, aerial spraying and date of imagery in 2005.
Corrections Department Interpretation for clouds
3 132 49 119 11 28 51 23 112 93 1 2 56 144 15 54 6 711 267 62 3 0 0 1.942

for gaps in satellite images
55 442 149 235 0 6 438 368 27 602 0 56 6 273 0 144 173 76 669 25 0 146 530 4.420

for aerial spraying
0 273 31 57 49 49 160 28 9 52 0 0 19 112 0 156 31 575 682 30 2 0 0 2.315

for date of imagery
34 109 -67 -62 0 2 29 147 120 87 0 18 0 -232 0 -35 52 209 596 -2 0 -15 30 1.020

Total 2005

Amazonas Antioquia Arauca Bolivar Boyacá Caldas Caqueta Cauca Chocó Córdoba Cundinamarca Guainía Guajira Guaviare Magdalena Meta N. de Santander Nariño Putumayo Santander Valle del Cauca Vaupés Vichada TOTAL

805 5.458 1.721 3.321 282 104 4.310 2.139 757 2.302 55 676 248 8.361 198 16.986 582 12.304 6.749 866 23 540 7.266 76.053

897 6.414 1.883 3.670 342 189 4.988 2.705 1.025 3.136 56 752 329 8.658 213 17.305 844 13.875 8.963 981 28 671 7.826 85.750

112

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Annex: List of satellite images used for the Colombia coca cultivation survey 2005
LandSat 7 ETM+
PATH 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 10 TOTAL ROW 58 59 56 57 58 60 61 62 63 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 52 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 54 55 56 57 58 59 Acquisition date (dd/mm/yyyy) 12/10/2005 12/10/2005 06/12/2005 01/09/2005 03/10/2005 01/09/2005 01/09/2005 01/09/2005 01/09/2005 29/12/2005 24/09/2005 - 27/11/2005 - 29/12/2005 27/11/2005 - 29/12/2005 10/10/2005 - 29/12/2005 29/12/2005 29/12/2005 29/12/2005 01/10/2005 - 06/02/2006 06/02/2006 06/02/2006 06/02/2006 01/10/2005 - 06/02/2006 01/10/2005 01/10/2005 01/10/2005 06/09/2005 27/12/2005 25/11/2005 27/12/2005 13/02/2006 08/10/2005 - 12/01/2006 12/01/2006 12/01/2006 22/09/2005 31/10/2005 18/12/2005 27/07/2005 - 18/12/2005 20/02/2006 19/01/2006 - 20/02/2006 19/01/2006 02/12/2005 28/08/2005 - 02/12/2005 28/08/2005 19/08/2005 - 10/01/2006 10/01/2006 15/03/2006 07/11/2005 07/11/2005 10/01/2006 04/09/2005 23/11/2005 23/11/2005 - 9/12/2005 13/10/2005 13/10/2005 27/09/2005 27/09/2005 09/07/2005 - 18/02/2006 18/02/2006 71 LATITUDE 0.60° 1.71° 2.25° 3.08° 3.61° 6.82° TOTAL -74.17° -77.35° -77.23° -72.25° -72.13° -71.44° 6

ASTER
LONGITUDE Acquisition date (dd/mm/yyyy) 11/12/2005 23/11/2005 23/11/2005 27/12/2005 27/12/2005 27/12/2005

SPOT 4
J 644 647 647 647 647 650 650 650 652 652 652 TOTAL K 328 332 343/2 344/2 345/2 343/2 344/2 345/2 343/2 344/2 345/2 11 Acquisition date (dd/mm/yyyy) 21/01/2006 16/02/2006 16/02/2006 16/02/2006 16/02/2006 30/11/2005 30/11/2005 30/11/2005 30/11/2005 30/11/2005 30/11/2005

113

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

Annex: Coca cultivation over Indigenous Territories11
INDIGENOUS TERRITORIES AFILADOR CAMPO ALEGRE (YARINAL AFILADORES) AGUA NEGRA AGUACLARA Y BELLA LUZ DEL RIO AMPARO AGUANEGRA AGUAS NEGRAS ALMIDON LA CEIBA ALPAMANGA ALTAMIRA ALTO ALBI ALTO ORITO ALTO SINU, ESMERALDA CRUZ GRANDE E IWAGADO ANDOUE DE ADUCHE BACATI-ARARA BACHACO BUENAVISTA BARRANCO CEIBA Y LAGUNA ARAGUATO BARRANCO COLORADO BARRANQUILLITA BELLA VISTA BELLAVISTA Y UNION PITALITO RIO SIGUIRI SUA-DOCAMPADO BUENAVISTA CABECERAS O PUERTO PIZARIO CAICEDONIA CALARCA CALENTURAS CALI-BARRANQUILLA CALLE SANTA ROSA RIO SAIJA CAÑAVERAL CAÑO JABON CAÑO NEGRO CAÑO OVEJAS (BETANIA- COROCITO) CARANACOA YURI-LAGUNA MOROCOTO CARPINTERO PALOMAS CARRIZAL CECILIA COCHA CHARCO CAIMAN CHIGORODO MEMBA CHIGUIRO CHINGUIRITO MIRA CHOCON CIBARIZA CONCORDIA CONSARA-MECAYA COROCORO COROPOYA CUASBIL - LA FALDADA CUENCA MEDIA Y ALTA DEL RIO INIRIDA CUMARAL-GUAMUCO DAMASCO VIDES DOMINICO-DONDOBO-APARTADO EL CEDRO,LAS PENAS,LA BRAVA,PILVI EL GRAN SABALO EL HACHA EL PROGRESO EL QUINCE EL TABLERO EL TIGRE EL UNUMA GABARRA-CATALAURA GRAN ROSARIO GUACAMAYAS MAMIYARE GUACO BAJO Y GUACO ALTO GUELNAMBI-CARAÑO HERICHA HONDA RIO GUISA INDAZABALETA INFI INGA-KASMA DE MOCOA HECTARES IN 2004 4 7 0 7 4 0 0 34 2 8 6 4 354 27 47 19 14 2 1 11 1 8 5 48 17 24 9 7 2 11 0 35 0 2 7 0 19 46 63 13 12 0 3 12 0 230 65 1 1 115 12 5 2 1 0 9 327 3 187 2 10 2 0 10 281 1 0 HECTARES IN 2005 10 7 6 3 4 12 1 2 10 3 34 9 298 12 10 13 49 3 1 49 1 6 21 8 39 15 2 21 1 16 19 21 3 3 5 3 16 24 69 18 21 7 12 10 9 160 95 5 12 213 22 13 1 1 1 13 499 1 284 14 13 3 2 6 86 7 1

The limits of indigenous territories were edited in 2005. The 2004 figures correspond to the new limits. 114

11

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005
INDIGENOUS TERRITORIES INTEGRADO EL CHARCO JAIDEZAVE JIRIJIRI KOGUI-MALAYO ARHUACO LA AGUADITA LA ASUNCION LA ESPERANZA LA FLORESTA-SANTA ROSA-RIO SANQUIANGA LA FUGA LA ITALIA LA LLANURA LA SAL LA TEËFILA LA TURBIA LA VORAGINE-LA ILUSION LA YUQUERA LAGARTO COCHA LAGOS DEL DORADO LAGOS DEL PASO Y EL ROMANSO LAGUNA NINAL,CUCUY,LOMABAJA LOS IGUANITOS MACUARE MANDIYACO MONOCHOA MOTILON-BARI NIÑERAS NUKAK MAKU NUNUYA DE VILLAZUL PARTE ALTA DEL RIO GUAINIA PATIO BONITO PIGUAMBI-PALANGALA PORVENIR LA BARRIALOSA PREDIO PUTUMAYO PUADO, MATARE, LA LERMA Y TERDO PUEBLO NUEVO-LAGUNA COLORADA PUERTO ALEGRE Y LA DIVISA PUERTO NARANJO-PEÑAS ROJAS-CUERAZO-EL DIAMANTE PUERTO NARE PUERTO VIEJO Y PUERTO ESPERANZA PUERTO ZABALO-LOS MONOS PULGANDE CAMPOALEGRE QUEBRADA QUERA REMANSO CHORRO BOCON RIO GARRAPATAS RIO GUANGUI RIO PAVASA Y QUEBRADA JELLA RIO PUERRICHA RIO SIARE RIOS CATRU Y DUBASA RIOS MUCO Y GUARROJO RIOS TOMO Y WEBERI RIOS TORREIDO Y CHIMANI ROQUEROS SAN AGUSTIN-LA FLORESTA SAN ISIDRO ALMORZADERO LA UNIËN SAN JOAQUIN SAN MATIAS O JAI-DUKAMA SAN QUININI SANANDOCITO SANTA CRUZ DE PINUÑA BLANCO SANTA ROSA DEL GUAMUEZ SANTA ROSA SUCUMBIOS EL DIVISO SANTA TERESITA DEL TUPARRO SARACURE Y RIO CADA SELVA MATAVAN SELVA VERDE SUANDE GUIGUAY TONINA-SEJAL-SAN JOSE-OTROS TUCAN DE CAÑO GIRIZA LA PALMA TUKANARE VALLES DEL SOL VAUPES VILLA CATALINA VUELTA DEL ALIVIO HECTARES IN 2004 13 0 0 302 0 5 1 7 38 3 28 71 0 7 29 10 5 248 0 0 12 0 15 25 1 18 3 16 0 6 1 815 0 3 2 2 49 13 35 32 0 3 43 8 4 5 0 38 2 2 3 2 3 3 0 1 0 11 7 3 4 24 304 43 9 108 11 3 2 13 424 12 2 HECTARES IN 2005 19 2 2 164 6 1 3 34 12 0 13 6 4 36 18 17 2 272 29 3 41 2 6 4 2 28 7 9 5 1 9 1000 2 3 11 7 53 36 34 4 3 3 22 8 4 7 8 144 14 6 21 1 3 4 1 4 7 10 9 6 9 31 484 99 3 64 5 9 0 14 197 8 5

115

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005
INDIGENOUS TERRITORIES YANACONA DE SANTA MARTA YARINAL (SAN MARCELINO) YAVILLA II Z.E. Z.E.D. Total area HECTARES IN 2004 0 11 11 3 0 5096 HECTARES IN 2005 1 45 42 2 4 5571

116

Colombia Coca Survey for 2005

For more information please contact: UNODC Colombia Calle 102 No. 18-61 Edificio Rodrigo Lara Bonilla Bogotá, Colombia TEL: +57 1 6467000 Fax: +57 1 6556010 www.unodc.org www.unodc.org/colombia fo.colombia@unodc.org All rights are reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems without permission in writing from UNODC. This includes the reproduction of single pictures, or parts of text, graphics, table or maps in magazines, newspapers or in any digital form, or for public events,

117