Andean Full Report

COCA CULTIVATION IN THE ANDEAN REGION
A survey of Bolivia, Colombia and Peru
June 2006
Government of Bolivia Government of Colombia Government of Peru

UNODC's Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme (ICMP) promotes the development and
maintenance of a global network of illicit crop monitoring systems in the context of the illicit crop
elimination objective set by the United Nations General Assembly Special Session on Drugs. It
provides overall coordination and direct technical support and supervision to UNODC supported
annual illicit crop surveys at the country level.
This reports presents the results of the annual coca cultivation surveys in Bolivia, Colombia, and
Peru, which were conducted jointly by UNODC (ICMP) and the respective Governments with a
regional perspective.
The implementation of UNODC's Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme in the Andean countries was
made possible thanks to financial contributions from the Governments of the United States of
America, the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, France and Austria.
This report and other ICMP survey reports can be downloaded from:
www.unodc.org/unodc/en/crop_monitoring.html
The boundaries, names and designations used in all maps in this document do not imply official
endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
This document has not been formally edited.

CONTENTS
Preface......................................................................................................................................iii
Part 1. Regional Overview .......................................................................................................1
Introduction .............................................................................................................................1
Coca cultivation in the Andean region ....................................................................................7
Eradication........................................................................................................................... 10
Production of coca leaf and derivatives............................................................................... 10
Cocaine seizures and seized coca processing laboratories................................................ 12
Farm-gate values and farm-gate prices............................................................................... 13
Cocaine abuse in Latin America.......................................................................................... 15
Poverty and development.................................................................................................... 15
Part 2. Environmental effects of illicit drug cultivation and processing ......................... 17
Deforestation and illicit crops............................................................................................... 19

Illicit drug cultivation and processing impacts on soils and water sources.......................... 30
The effects of illicit drugs on protected areas...................................................................... 32
Effects of illicit crops on biodiversity .................................................................................... 37
Effects of illicit drug cultivation on local people ................................................................... 43
Effects of illicit drug eradication on the environment and local people................................ 43
Issues for analysis of the environmental effects of illicit drug cultivation in the Andes ....... 44
Part 3. Bolivia Coca Cultivation Survey ...............................................................................49

Introduction ...........................................................................................................................55
Findings ................................................................................................................................57
Part 4. Colombia Coca Cultivation Survey.........................................................................103
Introduction .........................................................................................................................108
Findings ..............................................................................................................................110
Part 5. Peru Coca Cultivation Survey .................................................................................183
Introduction .........................................................................................................................189
Findings ..............................................................................................................................190
i
PREFACE
Coca cultivation remained stable in the Andean region in 2005. There were slight decreases in
Bolivia and Peru, offset by an increase in Colombia.
This year, when carrying out the Colombia coca crop survey, UNODC – in co-operation with the
Colombian Government – did new field research that measured the yield of coca leaf harvested
and how much cocaine base farmers get from the leaves. This research compliments the annual
monitoring of the amount of land under cultivation. These new field studies show that there is a
higher yield of cocaine from the coca crop than previously estimated. A similar review can be
expected in Bolivia and Peru. UNODC has reflected this new evidence in its 2004 and 2005 coca
production figures. The resultant higher bars in the histograms reflect the new estimation method
and should not be read as a change in the trend.
The fact that there are higher than expected average annual yields for pure cocaine hydrochloride
may help to explain why the price and purity of cocaine have remained steady on the streets of
consuming countries despite the overall reduction in world supply and a dramatic increase in
cocaine seizures.
At the same time, there is evidence that giving farmers alternative sources of income so they do
not have to grow coca can work. Products such as coffee resulting from alternative development
projects are competing on the open market. However, the scale is still very small and needs to be
multiplied at least tenfold in order to reach all impoverished farmers who need support. This is a
major undertaking, but it could reduce poverty and the world supply of cocaine at the same time.
Otherwise, further reductions in supply may be resisted by farmers who oppose forced eradication.
Ideally, farmers would see for themselves the merits of alternative development, pull up their
illicit crops and switch to licit, sustainable livelihoods.
To further reduce the world supply of cocaine, a number of points should be considered:
x Richer countries – the consumers of cocaine – need to invest more in alternative

development in the countries that produce cocaine in order to enable farmers to have
viable alternatives to illicit crops. Crop eradication will not work over the long term if
there is no legal economy to replace it;
x Rural communities in Bolivia, Colombia and Peru are among the poorest in the world.
Eradicating illicit crops – grown by some of the poorest and most vulnerable members of
these poor societies – needs to be considered in the broader context of social and
economic development;
x Inter-agency and international law enforcement is improving, manifested by an increase
in cocaine seizures. The same efficiency and enthusiasm should be shown to tackling
corruption and organized crime in order to go after the billions of dollars that are being
made through the narco-economy – money that is empowering cartels, funding
insurgency and even financing terrorism;
x Illegal cocaine laboratories are becoming more effective in their production techniques,
but represent a weak link since coca can not be converted into cocaine without them.
More attention needs to be placed on intercepting precursor chemicals and targeting the
labs;
x Demand for cocaine remains high and is growing in Europe. This is a trend that Europe
ignores at its peril. The West needs to curb its appetite for cocaine, or be prepared for
increased health, social, and crime problems.
The drug control balance in the Andean region is fragile. Governments are trying to hold the line
on the significant reductions that have been made in the past five years – overall figures remain
iii
one third below their peak of 2000. But this can only be done through a social contract at home,
based on significant international assistance. This should provide farmers with tangible benefits as
well as hope for a better future based on sustainable livelihoods.
There also needs to be a stronger commitment from wealthier countries – the main consumers of
cocaine – to reduce demand for a product that fuels addiction, illness, social disorder, and
organized crime. This is a shared responsibility.
We need to redouble our efforts, not only to avoid an unravelling of the significant progress that
has been made in reducing the world’s supply of cocaine, but to provide sustainable long-term
strategies to eradicate poverty and improve security in countries and communities blighted by the
threat posed by drug cartels, traffickers and dealers.
This is more than a short-term process that can be measured through annual surveys. Both sound
domestic policies and steady international engagement are required to address the root causes of
the problem and seek sustainable solutions that will build safer, more prosperous, and healthier
communities.
Antonio Maria Costa

Executive Director
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
iv
PART 1. REGIONAL OVERVIEW
Regional Overview
REGIONAL OVERVIEW
Introduction
In 1998, the United Nations General Assembly Special Session on Drugs (UNGASS) convened in
New York. At that meeting, Members States pledged to work towards achieving significant
reductions in illicit crop cultivation by the year 2008. To this end, UNODC established an Illicit
Crop Monitoring Programme (ICMP) to assist countries assess their progress in meeting
UNGASS targets. Through ICMP, UNODC supports the Governments of Bolivia, Colombia and
Peru in the implementation of national coca monitoring systems. While these monitoring systems
primarily focus on assessing the extend of coca cultivation, over the years they have gradually
integrated other important aspects related to the production and trafficking of coca leaf and its
derivates, such as prices or yields.
This report presents the results of the surveys on coca cultivation in the Andean region in 2005,
which were conducted jointly by the governments and UNODC. The regional overview in part one
summarizes the three country surveys, and discusses their results in a regional context. Part two
reviews environmental issues, which play an important role in the discussion on coca cultivation
in recent years. The following parts present the detailed results from Bolivia, Colombia and Peru.
1
Regional Overview
FACT SHEET - ANDEAN COCA SURVEYS FOR 2005

2004 2005 Variation
Global coca cultivation 158,000 ha 159,600 ha +1%
Colombia 80,000 ha 86,000 ha +8%
Peru 50,300 ha 48,200 ha -4%
Bolivia 27,700 ha 25,400 ha -8%
Farm-gate value of coca cultivation US$ 1,330 million

Colombia (coca products)1 US$ 843 million
Peru (coca leaf) US$ 304 million US$ 307 million +1%
Bolivia (coca leaf) US$ 240 million US$ 180 million -25%
Farmgate value of coca cultivation in
% of GDP
Colombia 0.7%
Peru 0.4% 0.4%
Bolivia 3.0% 2.1%
Global cocaine production 937 mt 910 mt -3%

1
Colombia 640 mt 640 mt 0%
Peru 190 mt 180 mt -5%
Bolivia 107 mt 90 mt -16%
Average wholesale price of cocaine

Colombia (in main cities) US$ 1,710/kg US$ 1,860/kg +9%
Peru (in producing regions) US$ 890/kg US$ 890/kg 0%
Bolivia (in main cities) US$ 1,800/kg US$ 1,800/kg 0%
Europe US$ 45,830/kg US$ 47,690/kg +2%
United States US$ 22,070/kg n.a.

Reported eradication of coca
cultivation
Colombia 142,786 ha 170,042 ha +19%
Peru 10,399 ha 12,232 ha +18%
Bolivia 8,437 ha 6,073 ha -28%

Reported seizure of cocaine (HCl) in 264 mt n.a.
South America
Colombia 188 mt 173 mt
Peru 7,3 mt 2,2 mt
Bolivia 0.5 mt 1.3 mt

Reported seizure of cocaine in
West and Central Europe 79 mt n.a.
North America 196 mt n.a.
Note: Figures in italics are preliminary.
1
Colombian cocaine production for 2004 has been revised following the field findings obtained in
2005. Farm-gate values for 2004 are not available due to a change in methodology.
2
Regional Overview
Map 1: Coca cultivation density in the Andean Region, 2005

80°W 70°W 60°W
Colombia
Peru
Caribbean Sea
Bolivia
10°N
10°N
N A MA Catatumbo
PA South America
Norte de
Antioquia
VENEZUELA
Atrato
Cauca
GUYANA
COLOMBIA ta
a
^ Me
en
Magdal
d a
Bogota Vicha
iare
v
Gua
Meta -
Guaviare
Nariño
Putumayo -
Caqueta
0°
0°
Caq
u eta
ECUADOR Pu
t um
ay
o
Amazon
BRAZIL
Ma
ra
ñon
Uc
Hu
ay
al
Alto
ali
lag
a
Huallaga
10°S
10°S
r us
Pu
PERU
io s
Uru
En
La Convencion dre de D
b
e
am
Lima ^ Apurimac
ba
a
Mamore
and Lares M
Ene Gua
p are
Pacific Apu
i
Ben
r ima
c
Ocean
Yungas
Titica
Lakcae
^ Chapare
La Paz
Cultivation density BOLIVIA
2
(ha/km )
0.1 - 1.0
1.1 - 4.0
20°S
20°S
> 4.0
International Pilc
om ayo
boundaries PARAGUAY
0 500 250
Department km
CHILE
boundaries Geographic coordinates WGS 84
80°W 70°W ARGENTINA 60°W
Sources: Governments of Bolivia, Colombia y Peru, National monitoring systems supported by UNODC
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations
3
Regional Overview
Map 2: Coca cultivation by region in Bolivia, 2001 – 2005

65°W 60°W
Bolivia
Mad er a
10°S
10°S
SOUTH AMERICA
! BRAZIL
Cobija Pando
eD
ios
ed
M ad r
Ri o
It en
ez
i
en
oB
Ri
Ri o
Beni
300 ha
300 ha
PERU
Ma
n.ap.
n.av.
mor
e
Apolo !
13,800 ha
16,200 ha
17,300 ha
18,100 ha
15°S
15°S
Trinidad
La Paz
Tit
ic aca
10,100 ha
lak
7,300 ha
7,011 ha
e Yungas
n.av.
^La Paz
Chapare
Cochabamba
!
Santa Cruz
Cochabamba
!
! Santa Cruz
Oruro
Oruro
!
Sucre
!
Potosi
20°S
20°S
Chuquisaca
Potosi
Ri
!
o
Tarija
Pi
Tarija
l co
ma
yo
PA R A G U AY
CHILE Interpreted coca fields
Coca fields 2005
Coca cultivation (ha)

2002
2003
2004
ARGENTINA 2005
25°S
25°S
International boundaries
Department boundaries
0 150 300 n.av. Not available
km n.ap. Not applicable
Geographic coordinates, WGS 1984
1:8,012,898 Yun... Growing areas
65°W 60°W
Source: Government of Bolivia - National monitoring system supported by UNODC

The boundaries and names shown and the designation used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations
4
Regional Overview
Map 3: Coca cultivation by region in Colombia, 2001 – 2005
75°W 70°W
Colombia
Caribbean Sea
La Guajira
540
South America
Barranquilla
Atlántico
Cartagena Sierra Nevada
10°N
10°N
Cesar
Magdalena
PA VENEZUELA
NA Sucre Bolívar
M
Norte de
A
Córdoba Santander
Cucutá
15,630
Arauca
Antioquia Santander
Medellín Arauca
Central Puerto
Carreño
Boyacá
9,710
Chocó Casanare
Caldas
5°N
5°N
Risaralda Cundinamarca
Pacific Valle
Quindío Vichada
Orinoco
17,630
Ocean Bogotá
Tolima
Cali
25,960
Meta
Pacific Neiva
Guainía
Huila
Popayán
Cauca
Meta -
Tumaco
Nariño Florencia
Guaviare
Guaviare
Vaupés Mitú
13,950
Pasto Caquetá
Puerto
2,320
Asís
Putumayo
Putumayo -
0°
0°
Caquetá Amazonia BRAZIL
ECUADOR
Amazonas

PERU
2001
2002
2003
2004
Leticia
2005
0 150 300
km
International boundaries Geographic coordinates WGS 84
5°S
5°S
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
Regional Overview
Map 4: Coca cultivation by region in Peru, 2001 – 2005
80°W 75°W 70°W

0°
0°
Peru
Pu
tu
COLOMBIA
ma
y o
South America ECUADOR
70
Putumayo
Tumbes Loreto
nas
azo
Am
5°S
5°S
Piura Amazonas
ga
alla
430
Hu
Marañón
Lambayeque Cajamarca
Ma
San Martin
ra
ñon
BRAZIL
Uc
16,039
ay
ali
La Libertad
Hu
alla
917
ga
Aguaytia
Alto
Huallaga Huanuco

211
Ancash Ucayali
10°S
10°S
Palcazú - Pichis s
Pasco ru
Pachitea Pu
Pacific
12,503
Ocean
En
e
Junin
Ur
Lima
ub
15,530
am
La Convención
ba

Lima y Lares Madre de Dios
s
de Dio
Madre
292
Huancavelica
Cusco
Apurimac Apu
San Gabán
r ima
Ene c
2,250
Ayacucho Apurimac
Ica
Inambari
Puno
Tambopata
15°S
15°S
Titicaca
BOLIVIA
Arequipa Lake

Moquegua
2001
2002 Tacna
2003
2004
2005 0 150 300
km
Coca growing areas 2005 Geographic coordinates WGS 84
International boundaries CHILE
Department
80°W
boundaries 75°W 70°W
Source: Government of Peru - National of monitoring system supported by UNODC

6
Regional Overview
Coca cultivation in the Andean region

In 2005, coca cultivation in the Andean region increased by only one percent from 158,000 in
2004 to 159,600 hectares. This small hike reflects an 8% increase of cultivation in Colombia,
while coca cultivation in Bolivia and Peru fell by 8% and 4% respectively.
The majority of all coca cultivation, 54 percent, continues to take place in Colombia, Peru remains
second with 30 %, and Bolivia, with 16 %, is in third place. There was no indication of large
levels of coca cultivation outside Colombia, Peru and Bolivia.
Figure 1: Coca cultivation in the Andean region (ha), 1994 - 2005
250,000
200,000
hectares
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Bolivia Colombia Peru
Table 1: Coca cultivation in the Andean Region (ha), 1994-2005

% change
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2004-2005
Bolivia 48,100 48,600 48,100 45,800 38,000 21,800 14,600 19,900 21,600 23,600 27,700 25,400 -8%
Peru 108,600 115,300 94,400 68,800 51,000 38,700 43,400 46,200 46,700 44,200 50,300 48,200 -4%
Colombia 44,700 50,900 67,200 79,400 101,800 160,100 163,300 144,800 102,000 86,000 80,000 86,000 8%
Total 201,400 214,800 209,700 194,000 190,800 220,600 221,300 210,900 170,300 153,800 158,000 159,600 1%
Sources United States Department of States National Monitoring Systems Supported by UNODC
7
Regional Overview
In 2005, the total area under coca cultivation in Colombia increased by 6,000 hectares to 86,000
hectares, a 8% increase compared to late year’s estimate of 80,000 hectares, despite the continued
eradication effort of the Government of Colombia. This is the first increase following four
consecutive years of decrease in Colombia. In 2005, a total of 170,780 hectares were eradicated,
including 138,780 hectares through aerial spraying and 32,000 hectares manual eradication. The
area under coca cultivation in 2005 was still 47% lower compared to the peak annual estimate of
163,300 ha in 2000. The survey covered the whole country and detected coca cultivation in 23
departments out of 32.
The most important increases between 2004 and 2005 were observed in the departments of
Putumayo (bordering Ecuador) and Vichada (bordering Venezuela). Most of the new coca fields
in Putumayo were established on the foot hills close to the border with Narino and Cauca
Departments, where spraying is particularly difficult. The largest decrease took place in the
Department of Norte de Santander at the border with Venezuela where some important alternative
development projects have been implemented.
Figure 2: Coca cultivation in Colombia (ha), 1995-2005
180,000
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
hectares
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Sources: US Department of State National Monitoring System supported by UNODC
In 2005, the total area under coca cultivation in Peru was estimated at 48,200 ha. This represents a
decrease of 4% over the estimate of 50,300 ha for 2004. The decrease was mainly due to the
eradication campaigns implemented in the department of San Martin in Alto Huallaga region and
San Gaban valley. In these two regions alone, coca cultivation decreased from 4,000 ha in 2004 to
670 ha in 2005. This decrease was slightly offset by increases in others regions of Alto Huallaga,
and by relatively small increases in Apurimac-Ene and Aguaytia. Despite the decrease between
2004 and 2005, coca cultivation in Peru remained the second largest after Colombia. It represents
30% of the 2005 global coca cultivation, compared to 33% in 2004. A percentage that remained
much lower than ten years ago, when coca cultivation in Peru accounted for 54% of the cultivation
in the world.
8
Regional Overview
Figure 3: Coca cultivation in Peru (ha), 1995-2005
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
hectares
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
In 2005, the total area under coca cultivation in Bolivia was estimated at 25,400 ha, a decrease of
8% over to last year’s estimate of 27,700 ha. The decrease at the national level was due to a
decrease in the Chapare region, where coca cultivation decreased by 31% between 2004 and 2005.
The decrease in Chapare was attributed to the compliance of the farmers to the agreement of
October 2004 between the Government and coca growers federation, limiting coca cultivation to
0.16 ha by family.
Coca cultivation in the Yungas increased by 5% between 2004 and 2005 to reach 18,100 ha. The
Yungas remained the most important region for coca cultivation in Bolivia, accounting for 71% of
the total cultivation in 2005. The total estimate of 25,400 ha also included 12,000 hectares in the
Yungas (47% of total cultivation), permitted by the Bolivian Law No. 1008 (Law on the Regime
Applicable to Coca and Controlled Substances, 1988) for traditional uses such as leaf chewing,
medicinal preparations and coca tea. Further, the total included an additional 3,200 hectares of
coca cultivation temporarily authorized in October 2004 by the Bolivian Government in the
Chapare region.
Figure 4: Coca cultivation in Bolivia (ha), 1994-2005
60,000
50,000
40,000
hectares
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
9
Regional Overview
Eradication
In 2005, eradication reached record levels in Colombia, while there was a slight increase in Peru
and some decrease in Bolivia. Overall, the levels of eradication remained high in the three
countries in 2004.
Reports from the Colombian Government show that 138,775 hectares were sprayed, representing
an increase of 2% compared to last year. For the first time in 2005, spraying activities were
implemented in the departments of Chocó, Cundinamarca and Valle. In addition to spraying,
manual eradication of 31,287 hectares of coca cultivation was reported, a record compared to
previous years. The total of both types of eradication (spraying and manual) amounted to 170,042
hectares in 2005.
The Government of Peru reported the eradication of 12,232 ha of coca fields in 2005, of which
8,966 ha were eradicated as part of a forced eradication programme and 3,266 ha as part of a
programme of voluntary eradication. Total eradication increased by 19% compared to 2004. In
2005, the Bolivia reported the eradication of 6,073 ha of coca fields. No eradication was reported
in the Yungas of La Paz. The level of eradication decreased by 28% compared to 2004. In Peru
and Bolivia the eradication of coca cultivation is exclusively manual.
Figure 5: Eradication of coca bush in Bolivia, Colombia and Peru (ha)
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
year
Production of coca leaf and derivatives

Bolivia and Peru have areas where coca has been traditionally grown for local use of coca leaf. In
Colombia, traditional use of the coca leaf can be considered marginal, and virtually the entire coca
leaf production is destined for cocaine production. Therefore, farmers in Colombia trade leaves as
fresh or process them to coca paste or cocaine base in small “kitchens” located on the farm. In
Peru and Bolivia, farmers trade sun-dried leaves and, in both countries, the sun-dried coca leaf
trade for traditional, commercial or industrial uses is regulated by the Government. Leaves traded
outside the controlled market are destined for cocaine production.
In Colombia, the Government, jointly with UNODC, implemented a coca leaf yield survey, which
indicated that the coca leaf yields were higher than previously thought, establishing at 6,300
kg/hectare/yr of fresh coca leaf (equivalent to 2,700 kg/hectare/year of sun-dried coca leaf). With
the information provided by the farmers for coca paste and cocaine base production, and the
conversion factors provided by Operation Breakthrough for conversion to pure cocaine, the
10
Regional Overview
average annual yield per hectare for pure cocaine hydrochloride reached 7.7 kg/hectare, compared
to 4.7 kg/hectare previously used. Based on this data, the total cocaine production in Colombia for
2005 reached 640 metric tons cocaine.
In Peru, assuming an average sun-dried coca leaf yield of 2,200 kg/ha, the total sun-dried coca leaf
production was estimated at 106,000 metric tons. Of this amount, a study of the National Institute
of Statistics and Computer Science estimated that about 9,000 metric tons corresponded to the
annual demand for coca leaves for traditional, commercial or industrial uses. The balance is used
for cocaine production. Assuming a cocaine yield per hectare of 4.1 kg/ha – similar to the average
yield obtained in 2004 - the total rounded cocaine production in Peru was estimated at 180 metric
tons. Thus, cocaine production in Peru decreased by 5% compared to 190 metric tons produced in
2004.
In Bolivia, the overall area under coca cultivation produced an estimated 42,000 metric tons of
sun-dried leaf, of which 30,900 metric tons were estimated to be available for cocaine production.
The potential cocaine production in Bolivia amounted to 90 metric tons in 2005. This corresponds
to a decrease of 16% compared to the 2004 estimate of 107 metric tons. The significant decrease
in cocaine production reflects the large decrease in coca cultivation in the Chapare region (-31%)
where coca leaf yield was more than two times higher than elsewhere in the country (2,700 kg/ha
compared to 1,200 kg/ha sun-dried leaf).
Potential cocaine production in Colombia accounted for 70%, Peru for 20% and Bolivia for 10%
of the global potential cocaine production of 910 metric tons.
Figure 6: Global cocaine production (metric tons), 1990-20052
1,000
900
800
700
metric tons
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Table 2: Potential cocaine production in the Andean region (metric tons), 1994-2005
% change
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
2004-2005
Bolivia 255 240 215 200 150 70 43 60 60 79 107 90 -16%
Peru 435 460 435 325 240 175 141 150 165 155 190 180 -5%
Colombia 201 230 300 350 435 680 695 617 580 550 640 640 0%
Total 891 930 950 875 825 925 879 827 805 784 937 910 -3%
Source: UNODC World Drug Report 2006
2
Colombian cocaine production data for 2004 and 2005 is based on new field research.
11
Regional Overview
Cocaine seizures and seized coca processing laboratories

Global cocaine seizures increased by 18% to 588 metric tons in 2004, the highest figure ever
recorded. This followed an increase in global cocaine seizures of 34% in 2003. The increase in
cocaine seizures appears to be largely the result of better cooperation among law enforcement
services and improved sharing of intelligence information.
Most of the globally intercepted cocaine in 2004 was seized in the Americas (86%). South
America accounted for 45%, North America for 33% and Central America & the Caribbean for
8% of global seizures.
For the third year in a row, Colombia topped the ranking of world cocaine seizures, with almost
188 metric tons cocaine hydrochloride (HCl) and cocaine base seized in 2004, 32 per cent of the
world total and the highest such figure ever reported from any country. This clearly reflects the
strong enforcement efforts undertaken by the Colombian authorities over the last few years. An
analysis of the trafficking patterns done by the Colombian authorities revealed that more than half
of the country’s seizures took place at the ports; 60% of the cocaine left the country via the Pacific
coast and 40% via the Atlantic coast in 2004 .
Figure 7: Global cocaine seizures by region, 2004
S E IZUR E S of C OC AINE * (Kg and %) – B Y R E GION - 2004
- 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000
South America 264,087 ( 45%)
North America 195,968 (33%)
West & Central Europe 78,699 (13%)
Central America 29,762 (5%)
Caribbean 15,107 (3% )
West and Central Africa 1,798
East Africa 1,178
Southern Africa 611
Oceania 245
Southeast Europe 187
East and South-East Asia 155
East Europe 110
Near and Middle East /South-West Asia 104
North Africa 9
South Asia 6
Source: UNODC, Annual Reports Questionnaire Data / DELTA
In Peru, seizures of coca paste and cocaine hydrochloride decreased, but destruction and seizures
of coca leaves increased between 2004 and 2005. Seizures of cocaine hydrochloride decreased
from 7,3 mt in 2004 to 2,1 mt in 2005, while seizures and destruction of coca leaves increased
from 916 mt to 1,525 mt. There were, however, regular operations of the anti-narcotics police to
destroy coca maceration pits and clandestine laboratories.
In 2005, the Government of Bolivia reported the seizure of 886 metric tons of coca leaves,
representing a spectacular increase of 470% compared to the reported seizures of 155 metric tons
in 2004. The increase in seizure of coca leaf can be attributed to the strengthening of the special
12
Regional Overview
force for the control of coca leaves, which included the control of additional roads, and
improvement in equipment and infrastructure.
In addition, it should be noted that 2.1 metric tons of coca leaves from Peru were seized mostly in
La Paz department, representing 0.2% of the total seizure in Bolivia. These seizures occurred
mainly during the Bolivian dry season, when there is less coca leaf available in Bolivia.
In 2004, Governments reported the destruction of 8,208 coca processing laboratories worldwide,
an almost four-fold increase since 2000 when 2,104 laboratories were reported destroyed.
The destruction of laboratories and production sites reflects the fact that most processing of coca
leaf into cocaine takes place close to the cultivating areas in Bolivia, Colombia and Peru. This is
true for both the intermediate products coca paste/base and the final product, cocaine
hydrochloride. Bolivia, Colombia and Peru reported more than 99 per cent of the global total.
However, some differences exist between the three main coca cultivating countries. Whereas in
Bolivia and Peru, destroyed laboratories almost exclusively produced coca paste and cocaine base,
some 13 per cent of all coca processing laboratories destroyed in Colombia were manufacturing
cocaine. Ninety-four per cent of the 256 cocaine processing laboratories destroyed worldwide
were located in Colombia.
Farm-gate values and farm-gate prices

Farm-gate values of coca cultivation in Bolivia and Peru are based on sun-dried coca leaf
production. For Colombia, the farm gate value is based on the total production of each product
sold by the farmers (fresh leaf, coca paste and cocaine base).
The total farm-gate income value resulting from coca cultivation in Colombia was estimated at
about US$ 843 millions in 2005. This is 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.
Figure 8: Potential farm gate value of coca cultivation as % of GDP
900 2.5
800
2
700
600
1.5
million US$
500
400
1
300
200
0.5
100
0 0
Colombia
Bolivia Peru
(coca leaf and
(sun-dried coca leaf) (sun-dried coca leaf)
derivatives)
Farm-gate value 180 843 307
As % of GDP 2.1 0.7 0.4
13
Regional Overview
In Peru, the potential farm-gate value of the sun-dried coca leaf production amounted to about
US$ 307 million, estimated from the sale of 106,000 metric tons of coca leaf at 2.9 US$/kg in
2005. This represented about 0.4% of the 2004 GDP estimated at US$ 68.6 billion .
Farm-gate value of coca leaf production in Bolivia reached US$ 180 million in 2005. This
estimate took into account the total value of the controlled market, as well as the farm-gate value
of coca leaf outside this market. Total value was equivalent to 2.1% of the country’s GDP for
2005 (US$ 8.4 billion) or 12% of the value of the agricultural sector in 2003 (US$ 1.5 billion).
Although the farm-gate value of coca leaf in Bolivia is the smallest among the three countries, it is
equivalent to a much higher proportion of the GDP compared to Colombia and Peru. This
indicates the relative importance the coca sector has for the Bolivian economy.
Farm-gate prices
Prices for illicit products are subject to several factors besides the reactions to supply and demand.
One should take into consideration that coca cultivation in many areas takes place under the
control of armed groups or under the influence of drug cartels that tend to monopolise the coca
trade and impose their prices and conditions on the farmers. Besides this, eradication efforts,
changes in the currency exchange rate between the local currency and the US dollar, price
increases or decrease of agricultural inputs or precursors all play a role in determining price levels.
In Bolivia and Peru, the markets for sun-dried coca leaf are regulated by government institutions.
Typically, prices on the government controlled markets are lower than those obtained outside
these markets. Coca leaves not traded through the government controlled channels are destined for
cocaine production.
Figure 9: Prices for sun-dried coca leaf in Bolivia and Peru (US$/kg), 1990 - 2005
4
Bolivia
US$
Peru
3
0
Jan-90
Jan-91
Jan-92
Jan-93
Jan-94
Jan-95
Jan-96
Jan-97
Jan-98
Jan-99
Jan-00
Jan-01
Jan-02
Jan-03
Jan-04
Jan-05
Jan-06
Following an increase in eradication, farm-gate prices for sun-dried coca leaf in Bolivia reached a
peak of around US$ 6 in 2000. Since then, prices fell to below US$ 4 but continued to be
substantially higher than in neighbouring Peru (US$ 2.9/kg in 2005). There, prices have shown a
rather steady increase since 1996. This was the year, when prices fell drastically after having
reached peaks of over US$ 4 in the early 1990s. There is some evidence from seizure data that
sun-dried coca leaves are trafficked from Peru to Bolivia.
14
Regional Overview
Converted into dry leaf equivalents, prices for fresh coca leaf in Colombia (US$ 2.56/kg) are
comparable to prices for sun-dried leaf in Peru but lower than in Bolivia. After a sharp increase in
2001, which can be seen in connection with the successful efforts of governments to stop the
trafficking of cocaine base from Peru to Colombia, prices for coca paste in Colombia tend to
oscillate around 2,100,000 Colombian Pesos (US$ 900) per kilogramme.
Figure 10: Colombia, average price for coca paste (COP/kg), 1999 - 2005
2,400
2,300
'000 Colombian pesos/kg
2,200
2,100
2,000
1,900
1,800
1,700
1,600
1,500
Dec-99 Dec-00 Dec-01 Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05
Cocaine abuse in Latin America

A lesser known fact is that South America is the world's third largest market for cocaine use with
an estimated 1,981,000 users (2004/5). Prevalence rate of cocaine abuse among the population age
15-64 are as high as those for Europe (0.7%), although considerably lower than in North America
(2.3%). The prevalence rate in the main coca cultivation countries is close or above the regional
average thus indicating a strong link between illicit crop cultivation, cocaine production and
abuse. In Bolivia, which has prevalence rates well over the Latin American average, annual
prevalence of cocaine use largely follows the trend of domestic cocaine production. Following
strong increases in the early 1990s until 1996, cocaine prevalence rates declined and started
increasing again only over the 2000 to 2005 period, reaching 1.6% for cocaine HCl and 1.9% for
cocaine base in 2005.
Poverty and development

Despite the obvious geographic association of rural underdevelopment and coca cultivation, it is a
much more complex task to assess how coca cultivation and poverty are linked on the household
level. Due to the illicit nature of coca cultivation and the security situation in many growing areas,
comprehensive data on the household level allowing a direct comparison between coca-growing
and non-coca-growing households is scarce. A first assessment can be made by taking into
consideration the farm-gate value of coca products and the number of families estimated to be
involved in coca cultivation.
Farmers in Colombia, the largest producer of coca leaf, produced US$ 843 million worth of
cocaine base. This translates into a gross per capita income of US$ 2,500 for members of coca
farming households. However, production costs for fertilizer, agro-chemicals, and hired labour
have to be deducted from this amount. It seems that even the gross per capita income derived from
coca cultivation is well below the average GDP per capita, confirming that coca farmers belong
the economically worse off part of the population. The figures for Peru and Bolivia show a similar
scenario.
15
Regional Overview
Table 3: Farm-gate value and per capita income from coca
Potential farm-gate value No. of households

of coca products 2005 involved in coca Per capita income GDP per capita
(million US$) cultivationª from coca (US$) (US$)
Bolivia 180 40,000 900 974b

Colombia 843 68,600 2,500 2,700c
Peru 307 50,000 1,200 2,490 b
a Estimates for Bolivia and Peru are derived from the average field size per household. The estimate for Colombia is based on
field research.
b 2004 GDP for Bolivia and Peru, World Bank
c 2005 GDP for Colombia, National Department of Statistics, Colombia
A study on coca yield in conducted by the Government of Colombia and UNODC in 2005 also
covered some poverty-related aspects of coca cultivation. When asked for the main reason for
growing coca, 55% of the farmers mentioned economic reasons, either mentioning openly the
profitability of doing so or the fact that coca leaves and derivatives are easily marketable. Another
28% claimed they had no other choice, and the remaining 17% stated that coca cultivation was
part of the local culture.
In Bolivia, Human Development Index (HDI) values for 2001 are available at the municipality
level. Coca cultivation was found in 17 out of the 326 municipalities in the country. The average
HDI for the coca-growing municipalities was 0.54, indicating that their population is slightly
worse-off compared to the non-growing municipalities, which had an HDI of 0.57. However, the
difference was not statistically significant, so that this result cannot be interpreted as indicating a
generally lower HDI in coca-growing municipalities.
Alternative development is an approach specifically designed to discourage farmers from growing
illicit crops. Alternative development programmes contribute to prevention and reduction of coca
cultivation as well as to the overall development of the local community. However, alternative
development currently reach only a fraction of the population involved in illicit crop cultivation or
at risk to do so. Alternative development programmes are being carried out by UNODC in Bolivia,
Colombia, Ecuador and Peru.
In Colombia, a study by the Colombian government and UNODC revealed that only 9% of the
coca farmers interviewed reported having received any kind of assistance to stop growing coca
plants. In fact, only about 6,800 households are being assisted by UNODC through alternative
developments projects in the country. Those that do receive assistance, cultivate around 80,000
hectares of licit crops, a figure almost as high as the total area under coca cultivation. In addition,
the Colombian government reaches over 31,000 beneficiaries with its forest warden families
programme, which provides incentives to communities to reduce coca cultivation and preserve the
environment.
Compared to the estimated number of households involved in coca cultivation, Bolivia has the
highest proportion of households assisted by UNODC's alternative development programmes.
These 9,100 households cultivate about 210,000 hectares of licit crops, seven times the area under
coca.
Alternative development projects started as early as 1986 in Peru. The remarkable success in
reducing coca cultivation from 129,000 hectares at its peak in 1992 to below 50,000 hectares in
2005 can be attributed to a combination of eradication efforts, air control to prevent the transport
of coca paste towards Colombia, and the implementation of alternative development projects. In
some areas targeted by these projects such as Bajo Huallaga, coca cultivation virtually
disappeared.
16
PART 2. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ILLICIT
DRUG CULTIVATION AND PROCESSING
Environmental Effects
THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ILLICIT DRUG

CULTIVATION AND PROCESSING
This chapter is based on a report commissioned by the Research and Analysis Section of the
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) to the UNEP World Conservation
Monitoring Centre. The report is a desk study intended to aid UNODC in understanding the status
of knowledge on the environmental impact of illegal drug production and manufacture in the
Andean region. This chapter focuses on the environmental effects of illicit drug cultivation in
Colombia, Peru and Bolivia and provides a summary of knowledge on coca cultivation and its
impact on forests, rivers, and groundwater. It also summarises the known impact on protected
areas and biodiversity in the region, and includes some new spatial analyses. The effects of illicit
drug cultivation on local people and of eradication measures are also briefly covered.
Deforestation and illicit crops

The most obvious environmental effect of coca and opium poppy cultivation is the clearance of
forests. This section first gives an overview of the forest types and their extent in Colombia, Peru
and Bolivia, as the context for an analysis of the relative importance of coca and opium cultivation
in deforestation. This analysis includes an examination of the dynamics of coca cultivation as part
of other agricultural activities and socio-economic factors, such as eradication, lawlessness and
colonisation policies.
The natural environments of the Andean region have been classified into seven major biomes, or
types of vegetation (Table 4). The illicit drug crops of opium poppy, coca and marijuana are all
grown in the wet or humid forest biomes. Coca is principally grown in lowland and lower-
montane regions, from sea level up to 2,000 m altitude. Opium poppy is usually grown at higher
altitudes, from 1,000 m to 3,500 meters above sea leavel (m.a.s.l.), and so affects lower and upper
montane forest areas, which include the tropical cloud forests.
Table 4: Biomes of the Andean region and illicit crops

Biomes of the Andean region Illicit crops
cultivated
1.a) Tropical and subtropical wet forests. Include tropical Poppy, coca
1.b) Wet forest in lowlands up to 600 m.a.s.l.; tropical montane forests (600 to 1200
m.a.s.l) and tropical cloud forests (1200 to 2000 m.a.s.l.)
2. Tropical and subtropical dry forests
3. Grasslands, savannas, tropical and subtropical shrubs Coca
4. Seasonally-flooded savannas and grasslands
5. Grasslands and shrubs: punas in the drier and paramos in the wetter areas Poppy
6.Deserts and xerophytic shrubs
7.Mangroves Coca
Source: UNEP & Comunidad Andina (2003). The crops cultivated in each biome have been compiled by this review.
The lowland and montane forests form a major part of the natural resources of Colombia, Peru and
Bolivia, still covering 48 to 58% of these countries. Deforestation rates are calculated by the
relevant national forest agencies and compiled by FAO. The latest available figures are for the
period 1990 to 2000 and show significant rates of deforestation. Differences between figures from
different sources are due to differences in the methodologies used for forest definition and
measurement.
19
Table 5: Forest Coverage Indicators in the Andean region for 1997

Country Forest Area (ha) Forest Natural forest/ Annual changes in forest
total land cover (ha)
ha per capita
Bolivia 49 670 000 6.5 48.6% -581 000
Peru 67 562 000 2.8 58.9% -217 000
Colombia 52 988 000 1.5 49.1% -262 000
Source: FAO (1997); UNEP & Comunidad Andina (2003).
Table 6: Forest cover & change 1990 - 2000 in the Andean region
Forest cover Forest cover change 1990-2000
Country
(ha) (ha/year) (%/year)
Bolivia 53 068 062 -161 075 -0.3
Peru 65 215 364 -268 794 -0.4
Colombia 49 601 300 -190 470 -0.4
Source: FAO (2000)
For Colombia, a more detailed analysis of the extent of clearance of forest and reduction in area of
other biomes is available. This shows that whilst the tropical wet forests (‘rain forests’) are the
largest biome, covering over 32 million hectares in 1998, over 11 million hectares have been lost.
The Sub-Andean and Andean forests have lost 69 to 76% of their original cover. These are
favoured areas for the production of coca and opium, but have also been the most densely
populated parts of the country for centuries.
Forest logging and establishment of new coca fields in mountain areas, Antioquia and Bolivar
department, Colombia
20
Table 7: Alteration of biomes in Colombia, 1998

Ecosystems Original area (ha) Area (1998) ha Current Illicit crop
(%) cultivation
Tropical wet forests 44 050 000 32 316 500 73 coca, opium
Tropical dry forest 5 822 000 168 500 3
Sub-Andean forests (<1000m) 9 652 050 3 035 000 31 coca
Andean forests (1000 – 2000 m) 10 359 325 2 437 500 24 coca, opium
Wet high-Andean forests (>2000 m) 8 114 500 3 382 000 42 opium
Orinoquian Savannas 13 500 000 12 714 500 94 ?
Caribbean Savannas 750 000 416 000 55
Amazonian Savannas 807 500 807 500 100 ?
Amazonian hills and shrub forests 2 555 575 2 555 575 100 ?
Semiarid forests and shrubs 375 500 350 500 93
Arid Shrubs 709 750 685 000 97
Andean dry forests and shrubs* 2 255 000 1 198 500 53
Caatingas (Amazonia) 2 805 000 2 805 000 100
Alluvial TWF* 7 327 150 5 210 000 71
Flooded forests and shrubs 2 377 950 990 000 42
Andean wetlands* 29 000 17 000 58
Mangroves 585 000 501 000 86
Paramos and Sub-paramo* 1 622 000 1 381 000 85 opium
* Ecosystems very degraded in several areas
Source: Adapted from Etter and Wyngaarden (1999).
Coca cultivation is, of course, only one factor in deforestation in Colombia, Peru and Bolivia. The
clearance of forests is driven by a complex set of factors, ranging from the decisions of local
people and government, commercial enterprises, national and international governmental policies
to market forces.
The relative role of coca cultivation and eradication activities in deforestation varies between
countries and regions. Unfortunately, UNODC is not aware of a quantitative analysis of the
relative importance of the factors causing deforestation in the region. Much of the literature on the
environmental effects of illicit drug cultivation and processing in the region asserts that the
cultivation of illegal drugs has caused the deforestation of tens of thousands or even millions of
hectares. These statements are, however, rarely supported by specific studies of the role of illegal
drugs in deforestation.
Colombia
Although there are several estimates of the area deforested in Colombia as a result of coca
cultivation, these estimates are usually based on extrapolations from the area of coca crops, rather
than specific surveys of forest loss due to coca. Several authors refer to an estimate of 425,600
hectares of accumulated deforested areas between 1987 and 1998, produced by Bernal (2002).
This is based on a calculation of the estimated annual accumulation in area of coca cultivation
multiplied by four.
21
This ratio has been cited widely, but there is no explanation of how it was determined. An
alternative estimate suggests that for each hectare of coca, another hectare of forest is cleared
(Thoumi, 2001). Again, it is not clear how this ratio was calculated.
It is not valid to simply extrapolate the area deforested from annual figures of area of coca crops,
as new coca plots may be established on existing agricultural land or secondary forest (cleared
forest in the process of regeneration).
Clearly, the deforestation caused by illicit crop cultivation is not limited to the area planted with
illicit crops, as forest is also cleared for subsistence crops, cattle pasture and housing, and in some
cases for airstrips. In any individual case, the ratio of forest cleared will depend on local
conditions, the agricultural system in use and the type of producer (small, medium or industrial).
The area of forest cleared for coca will be much greater where growers have moved to a new
region, compared to that seen in already settled lands.
Coca fields in the Sierra Nevada region, Colombia
Álvarez (2002b) states that:

“It would be safe to assume that at least 60% of illicit crops are grown in newly deforested land,
that growers clear at least twice the surface of deforestation, and that area under illicit crops is
not cumulative due to eradication”.
From the 101,800 hectares of coca and 7,466 hectares of opium poppy cultivation reported in
1998, using these assumptions, Álvarez (2002b) estimated that 131,119 hectares of forest were
cleared for illicit crops and associated activities in 1998.
Diaz-Torres (2002), in his dissertation on the economic and social dynamics surrounding coca
cultivation, reports that:
“Between 1974 and 1998, illicit crops have brought direct devastation to more than 850,000 ha of
forest in Colombia” (Defensoria del Pueblo, 2000 in Diaz-Torres, 2002).
Juan Mayr, a former Colombian Minister of Environment (1998-2002), suggested in a workshop
on environment, illicit crops and alternative development (September 2000) that a million hectares
of native forests had been eliminated as consequence of the cultivation of illicit crops.
22
The only data source which gives a reliable figure for the area of primary forest loss due to coca
cultivation is the annual UNODC coca cultivation surveys for the years 2001 to 2005 (UNODC
Colombia, 2002; 2003; 2004; 2005). These surveys provide calculations of not only the area under
coca cultivation, but also the land use converted to coca, areas abandoned and newly cultivated
each year. The surveys are produced from satellite data and ground truthing. Table 8 shows the
extent of new, stable and abandoned coca plots for the four years from 2000 to 2004. The total
area under coca is slightly less than the national totals in the UNODC reports because of areas
classified as ‘uncertain changes and corrections’.
Many coca plots are abandoned each year to evade eradication. One of the consequence is that
new plots are established in other areas, although the extent to which new plots are made by new
farmers or by existing farmers responding to eradication measures is unknown. Another indicator
of the high mobility of coca cultivation and the short life of coca plots is the area of plots under
coca cultivation in the 2003 period that were also cultivated in 2000 - only about 2,085 hectares,
just 2% of the area under cultivation in 2003 (UNODC Colombia, 2004).
The area of new coca plots established each year has steadily decreased from a peak of
102,650 hectares in 2000 -2001 to 47,068 hectares in 2003 - 2004. This is a decrease from 71% to
59% of the total area in coca cultivation each year. In contrast, the area of stable coca plots from
one year to the next had returned in 2003 – 2004 to virtually the same as that in 2000 - 2001, at 33
281 hectares, after dropping to 11,558 hectares in 2002 - 2003. This increase in stability, along
with the reduction of the area of land abandoned from coca cultivation in that period to 53,068
hectares, compared to 121,099 hectares two years earlier, could indicate that eradication was less
effective in 2003 – 2004. However, the continued reduction in the total and new area of coca plots
in 2003 - 2004 indicates that the disincentive measures for coca cultivation are having an impact
on behaviour.
UNODC data are also available for a more detailed classification of the areas under coca for the
period 2000 to 2004. These data, based on comprehensive analysis of remote sensing imagery,
enable the first calculations of the extent of deforestation for coca cultivation and analysis of the
dynamics of associated land use. They estimate the areas of primary forest, secondary forest and
other vegetation (grassland and crops) converted to coca in each year over this period. Land no
longer cultivated for coca is classified as either abandoned to regenerate to (secondary) forest, or
converted to other land uses. The large areas of land for which land use changes are uncertain and
corrections have been made should be noted when drawing on this data.
Table 8: Extent of stable, new and abandoned coca plots in Colombia (ha), 2000-2004
2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004
Stable coca area 33 419 15 229 11 558 33 281
New coca plantings 102 650 79 239 67 325 47 068
Coca to other land use 117 681 121 099 79 152 53 068
TOTAL 253 750 215 567 158 035 133 417
Total coca cultivation 145 000 102 000 86 000 80 000

Source: (UNODC Colombia, 2002; 2003; 2004; 2005)
These data (Figure 11) estimate that over the four years from 2000 to 2004, a total of 97,622
hectares of primary forest was converted to coca cultivations in Colombia. The annual loss of
primary forest was similar in 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 at about 34,000 hectares, but decreased
by over 50% to 16,017 hectares converted in 2002-2003. This decrease continued in 2003-2004 to
13 202 hectares, which is only 39% of the area in 2000-2001. The high percentage of 20% of the
converted land area that was classified as ‘uncertain changes and corrections’ in 2002-2003 should
be noted.
Over the four year period of 2000 to 2004 the annual percentages of coca cultivation on land
cleared from primary forest were 25%, 37%, 20% and 20%, with an average of 26%. The
percentage of coca cultivation on land cleared from secondary forest, grassland and crops was
23
43%, 38%, 45% and 37% respectively over the same period. Thus, the ratio of new coca plots
established from primary forest compared to plots established from other land uses varied
from 1:1.7 to 1:1.0 to 1:2.2 to 1:1.9 over these four years. New coca plots were as least as
likely to be established on areas other than primary forest in 2001-2002, and much more
likely to be on land other than primary forest in the other three years.
Figure 11: Extent of stable, new and abandoned coca plots in Colombia (ha), 2000-2004
300000
250000
200000
hectares
150000
100000
50000
0
2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004
year
Stable coca area New coca plantings Coca to other land use
Source: (UNODC Colombia, 2002; 2003; 2004; 2005)
Figure 12: Land use converted to coca in Colombia (ha), 2000-2004
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
hectares
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004
year
Stable coca crops Primary forest to coca
Secondary forest to coca Other vegetation (grassland or crops) to coca
Uncertain changes & corrections
Source: (UNODC Colombia, 2005)
The data on total reduction of forest cover over Colombia and that on losses resulting from coca
cultivation span different periods of time, so only rough comparisons of the two can be made. It is
likely that several hundred thousand hectares of forest were cleared due to the direct and indirect
effects of coca cultivation prior to 2000, before UNODC estimates from remote sensed data were
available. Forest cover change in Colombia for the period 1990 – 2000 is estimated at –190,470
hectares per year. If this rate was assumed to have continued from 2000 to 2004, the total area
deforested in those four years would have been 761,880 hectares, of which the 97,622 hectares of
primary forest identified as converted to coca cultivations in this period would form 13%. As
already noted, the actual of primary forest cleared due to coca cultivation is greater than the area
24
being directly cultivated for this purpose, because of the other crops and activities of the farmers
including the opening of roads and airstrips for transport of coca products.
Figure 13: Land use of abandoned coca plots in Colombia (ha), 2000-2004
140000
120000
100000
hectares
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004
year
Coca to secondary forest Coca to other land use Uncertain changes & corrections
Source: (UNODC Colombia, 2005)
Two studies of particular regions of Colombia provide insights to the relative importance of coca
cultivation in deforestation processes. Viña et al. (2004) used satellite data to analyse land cover
change along a portion of the Colombia-Ecuador border, where coca cultivation is widespread.
Ramos and Ramos (2002) analysed the environmental impacts resulting from coca crops and the
coca laboratories in the municipality of Tibú, in the northeast of Colombia.
The Viña et al. (2004) study area consisted of the Putumayo Department of Colombia and the
province of Sucumbios in Ecuador, where the natural vegetation is lowland tropical rain forest.
During the early 1980s, coca cultivation appeared in the Department of Putumayo. By 2000, the
Department hosted 41% (66,022 hectares) of the national total of coca cultivation. Eradication
measures had reduced the area to 4,386 hectares by 2004 (UNODC Colombia, 2005). Viña et al.
(2004) analysed three dates of Landsat imagery for the 23 year period from 1973, 1985 and 1996
and the following quotations are from their paper:
“Between 1973 and 1996, the forest landscape of the entire study area was transformed by the
land-use practices of the local people who responded to multi-scale social and economic forces.
The Colombian side showed a forest-cover reduction of approximately 43%, while the Ecuadorian
side showed a forest-cover reduction of half that value (approximately 22%).”
“Between 1973 and 1985, the replacement of forested areas with agricultural lands was the most
predominant land-cover change observed. Most of this change corresponded to a replacement of
forests by pastures for cattle grazing, although cropland areas also constitute an important
component. Between 1985 and 1996 the increment in barren lands is the most conspicuous type of
land-cover change observed, particularly on the Colombian side, where these areas almost
doubled those of agricultural lands. This pattern may reflect a settler’s tendency to abandon
already established agricultural areas and to colonize new forest areas. Forest regeneration was
also very conspicuous in the Colombian side of the study area, although most of the abandoned
agricultural areas did not experience forest recovery, and were converted to barren lands.”
“Rates of deforestation on the Colombian side during the 1973 – 1985 period may be directly
associated to colonization pressures induced mainly by the intensification of oil-industry
operations. This conclusion does not seem valid for the 1985 - 1996 period, since the rate of
population growth during this time showed a significant reduction, while population rates
increased. We suggest that during this period, deforestation was directly related to coca
cultivation. The areas under the illegal crop increased drastically in the second half of the 1980s,
25
responding to both increase in the international market for illegal drugs and in increase in
lawlessness and political instability in Colombia.”
“Road construction was a dominant feature in the government-sanctioned colonization process on
the Ecuadorian side of the border. Approximately 90% of the areas deforested between 1973 and
1996 on the Ecuadorian side occurred within a 5 km buffer area either side of a road. Only 30%
of the deforestation on the Colombian side occurred within the 5 km buffer area [...] This
difference can also be explained by the predominance of coca cultivation on the Colombian side of
the border. Due to its illegal nature, areas planted with coca are usually placed in regions that
are remote and inaccessible; thus they are located preferably in areas recently cleared of forests
and isolated from already established cropland areas, as well as distant from roads and other
penetration routes (e.g. rivers).”
Ramos and Ramos (2002) analysed satellite images for the years 1999-2001, which had been
interpreted as part of the UNODC-Government of Colombia SIMCI (Sistema Integrado de
Monitoreo de Cultivos Ilicitos) project, to determine land use change in the municipality of Tibú.
The municipality has an area of about 236,460 hectares. Coca cultivation started in the area in the
late 1980s. Table 9 shows the distribution of different land uses in Tibú for 1999, 2000 and 2001.
Table 9: Land use in the Municipality of Tibú for 1999, 2000 and 2001
Land use Area (ha)
1999 2000 2001
Coca cultivation 10 143 3 533 10 390
Primary forest 122 279 118 923 77 870
Secondary forest, scrub 55 605 81 242 90 602
Pasture, low vegetation 41 422 43 627 76 100
Water bodies 3 217 4 764 4 209
Sand banks - 177 274
Other crops 49 9 -
Clouds and shadows 1 333 9 563 5 280
Roads and urban zones 2 325 1 471 1 985
Bare soil 88 1 287 1 491
Source: Ramos & Ramos 2002
The area of coca cultivation decreased by 65% between 1999 and 2000 due to aerial eradication
measures, but had recovered to the 1999 level a year later. The area of primary forest decreased by
36% of the three year period whilst the area of secondary forest increased by 62%. This is
predominantly due to two causes: (1) primary forests are being cleared due to diverse reasons,
including an increase in timber extraction, and an increase in the areas of both illicit and licit crops
and (2) abandonment of areas with illicit crops, which indicates a high rotation of crops.
Table 10: Areas deforested in the Municipality of Tibú by land cover, 1999-2001
Type of land cover Area (ha) %
Primary forest felled for coca cultivation 3 130 4
Secondary forest felled for coca cultivation 1 371 2
Primary forest felled for non-coca use 19 636 28
Secondary forest felled for non-coca use 14 830 21
Degraded primary forest 32 081 45
Source: Ramos & Ramos 2002
The loss of primary and secondary forest between 1999 and 2001 in Tibú was principally caused
by the establishment of non-coca land uses. However:
26
“Analysis of the mobility of land covers indicates that the principal agent driving the
establishment of these coverages is coca cultivation. The tendency is for primary forest to be
converted to coca […], to be later transformed from secondary forest to other land uses. It can be
concluded that the forest cover replaced directly by coca in the period of analysis is of 0.5 ha of
forest for 1 ha of coca cultivated” (Ramos & Ramos, 2002).
“It is noteworthy that 86% of the affected primary forests are converted to land covers other than
coca. This indicates that rather than resulting from operations for forestry purposes, forest
deterioration is related to the establishment of communities in the area. The social conditions of
the area mean that this process of colonization is disorderly and generates additional social and
environmental impacts. The development of coca cultivation gives some economic sustainability to
the local population, which permits them to pay for the labour of expansion and ownership of the
land. This colonization behaviour is different from other regions of the country, where the
cultivation of coca is characterised by a high dynamic of abandonment and planting, which leads
to the presence of forests in different states of succession” (Ramos & Ramos, 2002).
The study also examined the rate of forest fragmentation in the Municipality of Tibú, where the
number of fragments increased from 15,308 in 1999 to 16,024 in 2001. The average size of
fragments decreased from 7,988 hectares in 1999 to 4,860 hectares in 2001. Similarly, the size of
the largest fragment decreased by 45% from 33,632 hectares to 15,062 hectares over these three
years. It was noteworthy that 81% of the non-forested islands created in the interior of the forest
fragments were covered by coca at some point during the study.
“This allows confirmation that the coca fields are the driving force in the process of the loss of
forest cover” (Ramos & Ramos, 2002).
The Institute of Environmental Studies in Colombia (IDEAM) is currently developing a pilot
study on the effects of coca cultivation in deforestation in the Magdalena Medio region of the
Serrania of San Lucas, to assess deforestation indexes resulting from the cultivation of illicit crops
in the Forest Reserve. The results from this study were not yet available.
Peru
Coca cultivation has clearly been a significant factor in deforestation processes in the Andean
valleys of Peru where it is grown. Young (1996) reports that the establishment of ‘hill agriculture’
from 1975 in the Huallaga Valley (through colonization) was motivated at least in part by the
increasing value of coca leaves. This study has not found any calculations of the area deforested in
Peru due to coca cultivation based on the analysis of field data, or even published estimates of the
current extent of the country’s vegetation types. One deforestation estimate comes from Young
(2004a), who states,
“Roughly a third of Peru’s deforestation is in places where coca is grown, which would mean
700,000 to 1 million ha of tropical forest cut as a result”.
The basis for these figures is not given, but in an earlier paper, Young (1996) agrees with other
authors that:
“The area in coca fields must be multiplied many times in order to approximate the total area of
degraded pre-montane forest. Thus, by extrapolation, perhaps 500,000 to 1,000,000 ha have been
degraded in Peru as a result of conversion to ‘hill agriculture”.
Young (1996) also reports an estimate from Dourojeanni et al. (1989) that deforestation associated
with coca in Peru had affected about 700,000 hectares.
The increase of 6,100 hectares in coca cultivation between 2003 and 2004 was mainly in the
regions of Alto Huallaga, Apurimac–Ene and La Convencion–Lares (UNODC Peru, 2005), with
evidence from the satellite imagery and ground-truthing that this expansion includes deforestation
as well as conversion of existing agricultural plots. The types of land use being converted to coca
cultivation have not been quantified by UNODC for Peru as they have been for Colombia. An
annual increase of 6,100 hectares of coca cultivation could represent a significant level of
deforestation at the local and regional scales for the pre-montane humid forests where it occurs,
27
but is a small fraction of the national mean deforestation rate of 268,794 hectares reported by FAO
for 1990 - 2000 (FAO, 2000).
Young (2004b) concludes that:
“What coca/cocaine has done as an economic and social phenomenon is to provide the financial
means and motives for deforestation. It has also inverted typical spatial expectations of
deforestation. [Typically] people tend to [first] clear forests near roads and choose first the
flattest lands with the best soils. This logic is reversed with coca/cocaine: The best coca fields are
those that are most inaccessible to narcotic control efforts, that is, on isolated sites in hilly areas.
Thus, coca-related deforestation affects forests that otherwise would not have been attractive to
colonists.”
The same review also reports the effect of coca fields causing forest fragmentation, as small plots
within forests create patchwork landscapes with considerable forest edge that is unfavourable for
the survival of many species.
Bolivia
This study has not identified any national scale estimates of the area deforested in Bolivia due to
coca cultivation based on the analysis of field data, but some detailed studies have been conducted
for the Chapare region. Steininger et al. (2000b) calculated the rate of tropical deforestation in the
Amazonian lowland moist forest zone of Bolivia (>1000 mm/yr precipitation and below 1500 m
elevation). 152,900 hectares/yr of forest was lost from 1985 – 1986 to 1992 – 1994. They reported
that:
“Roadside deforestation has expanded most quickly in the Chapare municipality of Cochabamba,
where clearance for traditional crops and coca have reached from the highway to the Andean
foothills. Continued expansion in this area threatens to completely isolate over 4000 km2 of
foothill and montane forest from all neighbouring lowland forest.”
According to Salm and Liberman (1997), between 1985 and 1990, around 260 000 hectares of
primary forest were deforested in the Chapare region as part of the colonization process. Much
lower figures of primary forest loss in Chapare for this period were calculated by Henkel (1995),
from an analysis of Landsat satellite imagery to determine the rate and area of primary and
secondary forest conversion for the Chapare region from 1978 to 1990. During this period coca
cultivation increased from approximately 15,000 hectares to 61,000 hectares. This analysis found
that approximately 1,000 to 2,000 hectares per year of primary forest and 3,000 to 5,000 hectares
of secondary forest were converted to cultivation during this period. It was concluded that:
“Although this loss is significant, when compared with loss of primary forest during the 1960s and
1970s, when the Bolivian government built roads to and within the Chapare and promoted
colonization of this region, it is relatively small. During the period 1960 – 1978, 202 000 ha of
land were allocated to incoming colonists. Virtually all of this land had been cleared and
cultivated by 1978. At that time, vast areas of the older settled zones has been farmed out, and
colonists had begun to move inland to occupy and clear new forest lands” (Henkel, 1995).
The analysis estimated that approximately 45,000 hectares of new coca were planted between
1978 and 1990, of which 25,000 – 30,000 hectares came from secondary forest, 4,000 – 5,000
hectares from converting other cropland, and 8,000 – 10,000 hectares from converting primary
forest remnants in settled areas:
“The advantage to converting existing cropland and secondary forest to coca in the older settled
areas is one of accessibility. [In existing cultivated areas,] a well-developed road network already
existed, whereby coca leaves and chemicals could be moved easily to processing sites. Also, the
large numbers of labourers needed to produce, harvest, and process the leaves into coca paste
preferred to live and work in the areas of established settlement, rather than on new coca farms in
more remote areas. Moreover, the Bolivian government has attempted to restrict land occupancy
in the tropical forests around the fringes of Chapare. The 8 000 to 10 000 ha of primary forest
converted to coca came from clearing most of the remaining areas in primary forest on farms in
the old settled areas. Virtually all the primary forest in the old settled region of Chapare had been
cleared and placed in coca cultivation by 1990” (Henkel, 1995).
28
Bradley (2005) has also analysed impacts of coca cultivation on land-use and land-cover change in
the Chapare region, using satellite imagery from 1975 to 2000, participatory rural appraisal and
socio-economic data. Three communities were studied: Arequipa, dominated by coca production
and alternative development crops; Bogotá, a cattle rearing community; and Caracas, where fruit
cultivation dominated. Three major periods were determined from a land-management synopsis in
each community:
(i) pre-coca dominant, driven by weak national policies and economics, with high rates of
deforestation;
(ii) coca-dominant, influenced by the international coca / cocaine economy, with the lowest
rates of forest clearance; and
(iii) post coca-dominant, driven by strong international anti-narcotics policies, when forest
clearance accelerated again.
Bradley (2005) reported that the deforestation trajectories (rates) in his study differ from published
models. The variations are attributed to the rising dominance of coca being ascended by an
enforced substitute economy. Specific fragmentation patterns developed because of the spatial
arrangement of plots planned in the 1960s and the subsequent variation in land-use management
strategies between, as well as, within individual plots over time. Bradley concludes that:
“Overall, in the pursuit of global social gains, anti-narcotics policies caused rates of forest
clearance to increase in Chapare and because of non-conservationist planning, the connectivity
between montane and humid tropical forests at the margins of a biodiversity hotspot is severely
compromised”.
More detailed information on deforestation rates and driving forces from this study are in
progress, but were not available in time for this report.
Henkel (1995) also considered the role of the productivity of coca plantations and coca eradication
policies in Chapare on deforestation. The data sources for his analysis of the changes in the
farming system and its productivity are not given, but the conclusions are consistent with other
studies such as Bradley (2005). Henkel (1995) stated:
“The ability of farmers to make a living from 1 ha of coca and 1 ha of food crops has greatly
reduced the pressure on the land resources of Chapare. The monocultivation of coca, a crop that
lasts 15 to 20 years, requires much less land than the old system of agriculture, which resulted in
the clearing of extensive areas of primary forest to grow rice, maize, and bananas for cash crops.
Most of the primary forests of the Chapare had been cleared during the 1960s and 1970s, so very
little primary forest habitat was destroyed because of increases in coca cultivation during the
1980s.”
Henkel (1995) predicted that coca eradication and crop substitution programmes would increase
deforestation, because:
“Of the farms of the Chapare, approximately 80% are less than 10 ha in size, too small to support
a family under the agricultural systems and cropping combinations proposed by crop substitution
programmes. To create viable systems of agriculture to replace coca, farmers would have to be
able to increase farm size to at least 20 ha. Thus large numbers of farmers would have to be
moved out of the Chapare or additional land now in primary forest would have to be opened to
agriculture”.
This prediction of increased forest clearance appears to have been supported by the findings of
Bradley (2005). UNODC recognized that although there is a reduction in coca cultivation in some
regions such as Puerto Villarroel (Chapare), the increase in other areas such as Tiraque, Chimore
and Totora could be a knock-on result:
“This pressure for eradication may have pushed farmers to plant coca in more remote areas”
(UNODC Bolivia, 2004).
UNODC Bolivia (2005) reports new coca plots being established in areas of primary forest in the
Chapare and Yungas regions.
29
Preparation of coca fields in the Yungas, Bolivia
Illicit drug cultivation and processing impacts on soils and water

sources
The effects on soils of illicit drug production and eradication are not well studied. Little
information could be found for Colombia or Peru, but some field research has been carried out in
Bolivia. For Peru, Dourojeanni (1992) reviews the impact of coca cultivation on soil erosion.
Cultivation is in areas described as humid tropical subtropical forest, located between 700 and
2,000 m.a.s.l., where the rainfall ranges between 1,000 to 4,200 mm / year. The growers prefer
steep slopes with soils are of sandy clay texture because they provide good drainage. Control of
weeds and frequent harvesting result in bare soil, which can increase erosion, especially on slopes:
“The highly erosive character of coca is due to the ecological regions where it is planted and the
current cultivation practices” (Dourojeanni, 1992).
For Bolivia, Salm and Liberman (1997) describe traditional techniques used for soil preparation
and the terrace cultivation techniques of coca, which provide protection against erosion and
maximise the use of rainfall. However, Henkel (1995) reported a study of the effects of coca
cultivation on soil fertility in abandoned coca fields in Chapare. The soils were very low in
organic matter, nitrogen, phosphorous and other nutrients, and very high in acidity and aluminium
toxicity (Table 11). This makes colonisation by other plant species difficult. Low levels of organic
matter diminish retention of moisture; low levels of nutrients limit the growth of emergent species
and high concentrations of aluminium and acidity favour only tolerant species.
The main difference between cultivation in the Las Yungas and Chapare regions of Bolivia is that
traditional soil-protection measures such as terraces are absent in Chapare. This may be the cause
for quicker degradation of soils in Chapare and the cocales’ viability limit of 10-15 years (Salm &
Liberman, 1997).
30
Table 11: Effects of coca cultivation on soil fertility in the Chapare Region in Bolivia
Soil characteristic Virgin forest Abandoned coca fields
pH 4.8 4.1
Soluble cations 2.05 1.1
Calcium (mEq/100g) 2.1 0.08
Potassium (mEq/100g) 1.69 0.60
Magnesium (mEq/100g) 0.22 0.03
Sodium (mEq/100g) 6.8 1.3
Phosphorous (ppm) 4.6 7.4
Acidity (mEq/100g) 3.6 4.9
Organic material (%) 6.7 2.4
Source: Henkel, 1995.
In Colombia, coca farmers do not use traditional cultivation methods as in parts of Peru and
Bolivia, as coca cultivation is mostly for cocaine production. Coca growers are frequently people
displaced from other areas, with no knowledge of local and traditional agricultural activities. Their
main goal is to maximise the harvest rather than to maintain long-term soil productivity.
Damage to soils resulting from cultivation and elimination of the natural vegetation is widely
reported in reference to the environmental impacts of illicit drug cultivation, as are the likely
effects of the discharge of the chemical wastes from coca processing to soils and waterways.
However, very little field assessment on the quantity of discharges and their effects on the
environment (soils, fauna, flora or water) has been carried out by government agencies or
universities. The only analysis found by this study was conducted in Chapare (Bolivia) in 1992
(Southwest Research Associates, 1993, quoted by Henkel, 1995). Here, a study of three cocaine-
processing laboratories found that pollution was concentrated in a small area at the processing site.
Most chemicals were disposed of in holding ponds constructed for the purpose and were not
dumped into nearby streams. Chemical spills at the site were quickly diluted by the high rainfall
received in the region. Because coca processing sites are widely scattered in the Chapare,
pollution is widely dispersed rather than concentrated at a few large sites. Some loss of soil
microorganisms was noted, but no damage to wildlife, vegetation, fish species or bird life was
detected near the processing laboratories. However, the study did not assess the long-term effects
of pollution.
For Colombia, DNE (2002) states that the agrochemicals used in coca processing are capable of
polluting freshwater sources for human consumption, but no specific cases of this are given.
Ramos and Ramos (2002) provide an assessment of the toxicity and environmental risk of five
agrochemicals used in the production of coca in Colombia – the herbicides Anikalmina,
Glyphosate, Paraquat, and the insecticides Tamaron and Manzate. These descriptions include their
recorded half-life in soils and water. No field data are included.
In the Huallaga Valley, Peru's leading cocaine production zone, 28 of the 180 rivers had reached
the critical state by last year, warned Alex González, of the non-governmental organization
'Alternativa Verde' (Green Alternative).
''In all the area's rivers there was a great deal of contamination and in those where the damage
was most serious, valuable species of flora and fauna had disappeared, and even the surviving
species showed signs of genetic deterioration,'' González affirmed.
''The waters that used to be a crystal-clear source of life acquired a reddish, dead hue. And in the
rivers, fish were found with deformed spines and other anomalies,'' added the expert.
Comprehensive studies are not yet available, but it is estimated, based on global levels of coca
paste outputs, that thousands of tons of chemical waste are dumped into the Peruvian Amazon
region's rivers each year.
31
Contradrogas research in the areas where basic cocaine paste is produced reveals highly
contaminated areas along the jungle rivers Bocaz, Cacazú, Ene, Perené and Panga.
Repressive actions against paste production must also seek to eliminate its negative effects on the
environment, Batallanos stressed.
The Peruvian health directorate's office of water resources assures, for its part, that it has not yet
detected any impact of the polluted water on human health, though its officials acknowledge that
the contamination is a risk factor.
''Because of its illegal nature, the production of coca paste occurs in isolated and unpopulated
areas. The lack of a riverside population in those regions has meant we have not been able to
detect specific cases of poisoning,'' explained Fausto Roncal, head of the water resources division.
''The water currents carry everything downstream, such that the contamination is most lethal for
plant and animal species living in the aquatic environment,'' Roncal explained. (quoted from
http://www.tierramerica.net/2001/0225/acent.shtml)
Effects of illicit drug cultivation on protected areas

Many protected areas in the region have been affected by illicit drug cultivation. As well as the
direct effects of deforestation, the presence of illegal settlers, who are often associated with armed
groups, can significantly impede the management of the protected areas. These areas have been
designated with the intention of conserving the region’s biodiversity and associated ecosystem
services, so negative impacts on their vegetation represent a serious deviation from national
policy.
National Park Puinawa, Colombia, affected by licit crops
Colombia
Through the SIMCI Project, UNODC and the Government of Colombia have monitored the
presence of illicit coca crops in Colombian National Parks and provided updated data on extent
and trends. UNODC Colombia (2005) reported the presence of 5,400 hectares of coca in 13 of 50
National Parks. This represents about 0.05 % of the country’s protected area and 7 % of the total
32
surface under coca cultivation. Only a few protected areas appear to have experienced severe
deforestation. However, the data do not cover opium poppy cultivation in protected areas. Cavelier
and Etter (1995) report that the Nevado de Huila National Park and surrounding areas of moist
Andean forest has been one of the protected areas most affected by this crop.
Coca cultivation in Colombian National Parks has slightly decreased from 6,057 hectares in 2001
to 5,351 hectares in 2004. This decrease of 21% is less than the 45% decrease in the total area of
coca cultivation in Colombia over this period. Within this figure, an increase of 30% in the area of
cultivation between 2003 and 2004 is mainly due to better detection of existing coca plots in the
Sierra de Macarena National Park in 2004, because of cloud cover on the satellite images for
2003. There are no available data on the mobility of the crops in these areas. It should be noted
that aerial eradication of coca has not been allowed in protected areas.
The protected areas located in the lowland rain forest of the Colombian Amazonian region of
Sierra La Macarena, Nukak and La Paya are the most affected by coca cultivation, with 2,707
hectares, 1,044 hectares and 230 hectares of coca respectively in 2004. A particularly large
increase was observed in the Sierra La Macarena National Park, which is located in the
Departments of Meta and Guaviare. On a regional scale, the greatest area of coca cultivation in the
country was recorded in these departments, with about 28,509 hectares in 2004 (36% of the
national total). This is also the region where the greatest number of new coca plots were identified
in 2004, - 9,134 plots, covering 15,827 hectares. Furthermore, about 34,700 hectares of coca was
subject to aerial fumigation in the Meta - Guaviare region in 2004.
Table 12: Coca crops in national protected areas in Colombia, 2001-2004

Protected area Area-Ha 2001 Area-Ha 2002 Variation (02-01) Area-Ha- 2003 Variation (03-02) Area-Ha- 2004 Variation (04-03)
Alto Fragua - Indi Wasi 0 16 16 8 -8 12 4
Catatumbo -Bari 72 85 13 129 44 107 -22
Cordillera de los Picacho 243 34 -209 13 -21 15 2
Cocuy 0 0 0 1 1 -1
Tuparro 18 0 -18 0 0 0
Farallones de Cali 62 55 -6 2 -54 1 -1
Paya 640 600 -40 310 -290 230 -80
Katios 3 0 -3 0 0 0
Munchique 21 42 21 1 -41 8 7
Nukak 1 342 1 464 123 1 469 5 1 044 -425
Paramillo 295 48 -247 110 62 461 351
Puinawai 182 108 -73 33 -75 139 106
Sanquianga 6 49 43 7 -42 14 7
S. Chiribiquete 5 2 -3 0 -2 0
S. Macarena 1 618 1 450 -168 1 152 -297 2 707 1 555
S. Nevada de Santa Marta 326 246 -79 212 -34 241 29
Tama 17 0 -17 0 0 0
Tayrona 8 4 -4 4 0 0 -4
Tinigua 1 201 413 -787 340 -73 387 47
Total coca area (ha) 6 057 4 617 -1 440 3 790 -827 5 351 1 561
Source: Modified from Projecto SIMCI 2003
Parks with a significant increase in coca crops
Parks with a significant decrease or where coca crops appeared for the first time
Parks in which coca crops have now disappeared
Parks in which coca cultivation fluctuates
Paramillo National Park, located in northern Antioquia and southern Cordoba departments,
contains diverse ecosystems including paramo, cloud forest, Andean forest and tropical forests,
and suffered an increase from 110 to 461 hectares of coca between 2003 and 2004.
Coca cultivation has fluctuated for the past four years in several Parks. Tinigua National Park in
Meta department predominately contains tropical wet forest. Coca cultivation has diminished here
to only 30% of the original area, from 1 201 hectares in 2001, to about 400 hectares by 2004. The
area of coca in Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta has fluctuated between 326 and 241 hectares in the
past four years. Catatumbo-Bari Park, in Norte de Santander Department, is covered by tropical
wet forest and Andean forests and has contained about 100 hectares of coca over the last four
years.
In some other protected areas, cultivation of coca has diminished significantly or has disappeared
since 2001. Examples are Tama in Norte de Santander Department, dominated by Andean forests,
33
and Tayrona National Park in Magdalena Department, dominated by coastal and marine
ecosystems and some tropical dry forest. According to Andrade et al. (2004), in an essay on
‘forest without law’ in Colombia for the National Environmental Forum in 2004, the pressure
from illicit drug cultivation on the agricultural frontier has also threatened the following protected
areas: Nukak Reserve, Chiribiquete National Park, La Paya National Park (Putumayo) and the
Nevado del Huila National Park.
Peru
For the current study, a map of the protected areas in Peru and coca cultivation density in 2004
was produced by the UNODC office in Peru, using data on the coverage of protected areas of Peru
obtained by UNEP-WCMC from the Peruvian Instituto Nacional de Recursos Naturales
(INRENA). Only two of the 47 protected areas in Peru are currently affected by coca cultivation.
Impacts are relatively minor in terms of the area affected and the conservation status of the sites.
Table 13: Protected areas in Peru with coca cultivation in 2004.

Protected area Coca (ha)
Alexander von Humboldt National Forest 390
Tingo Maria National Park 15
Total 405
Source: UNODC and INRENA, 2005.
Of the two areas affected, Alexander von Humboldt National Forest is in the region of Aguaytia,
where a total of 500 hectares of coca was recorded in 2004, of which 78% is located in the
National Forest. 500 hectares represents only 1% of the national area of cultivation in 2004
(UNODC Peru, 2005). A similar figure of 510 hectares was recorded in Aguaytia in 2003, reduced
from about 1,000 hectares in 2001 and 2002. The protected area designation of National Forest is
not a strict designation for the conservation of biodiversity or natural features, rather, the goal is
forest management and timber production.
Tingo Maria National Park has an area of 4,777 hectares and is located near Haunuco in the south
of the Alto Huallaga region. Coca cultivation in the area is reported to lead to an unusual invasive
successional vegetation, and to the establishment of a fungus (seca seca) that inhibits growth of
alternative crops (Fernández-Dávila, 2004). The National Park was described by Young (1996) as:
“…established in 1965, but has never been actively protected and probably no longer serves an
important conservation purpose”.
Later efforts to improve the conservation situation have been made through the BIOFOR/USAID
project, which started in 2000 and whose aims include spreading the initially limited local
awareness of the park (Fernández-Dávila, 2004). Local people were involved in developing a
Master Plan for conservation and in defining the park’s boundaries (including a buffer zone),
which had not been especially well established in law.
Bolivia
UNODC Bolivia (2005) have analysed the extent of coca cultivation in the protected areas of
Bolivia for 2003 and 2004. There are 21 protected areas, including National Parks, in Bolivia,
totalling 165,000 km2, or 15% of the national territory. In 2004, coca cultivation was recorded in
three national parks. In Madidi National Park, in the Apolo region, only about 10 hectares of coca
cultivation were found. In contrast, 4,100 hectares of coca cultivation was found in the two
National Parks of Isiboro Sécure and Carrasco, in the Chapare region. Isiboro Sécure National
Park has an area of 1,200,000 hectares and Carrasco National Park covers 694,320 hectares. Both
sites protect complex ecosystems of mountain and lowland forests.
Between 2003 and 2004, coca cultivation increased by 71% within the National Parks, from
2,400 hectares to 4 100 hectares. A possible explanation could be that eradication measures in the
existing centres of production have led to the planting of new fields in more remote areas.
34
Between 2003 and 2004, the increase of 1 700 hectares within the National Parks represented 60%
of the total (2,800 hectares) increase in Chapare. While coca cultivation increased by 71% within
National Parks, it increased only by 22% outside their boundaries. Coca cultivation within Isiboro
Sécure and Carrasco National Parks represented 40% of the coca cultivation in Chapare.
35
Figure 14: Area of coca cultivated in protected areas in Colombia (ha), 2001-2004
Coca cultivated in Protected Areas in Colombia between 2001-2004
3000
2500
2000
2001
2002
1500 2003
ha
2004
1000
500
Paya
Tama
Katios
Cocuy
Nukak
Tinigua
Tuparro
Tayrona
Puinawai
Paramillo
Munchique
Sanquianga
S. Macarena
S. Chiribiquete
Catatumbo -Bari
Farallones de Cali
Alto Fragua - Indi Wasi

S. Nevada de Santa Marta
Source: Simci Project (2001 to 2004)

Effects of illicit crops on biodiversity

The ecosystems of the northern Andes have been identified by some authors as a global biodiversity
conservation priority due to their biological richness, high rates of endemism, complex biogeographical
patterns and multiple anthropogenic threats (Olson & Dinerstein, 1997, quoted by Dávalos, 2001;
Mittermeier et al, 1998; Stattersfield, 1998). The tropical Andean region is the most species rich and
diverse region on Earth, containing, for example, about one sixth of all plant species in less than one
percent of the world’s land area. Thus, the last remnants of Andean forest are targetted in both national
and international conservation agendas (IVH, 1997; WWF, 1996). The abundance of endemic species
associated with humid mountain regions at equatorial latitudes reflects the overwhelming effect of
mountain geography and climate on the generation and maintenance of regional species richness
(Rahbek & Graves, 2001).
The Tropical Andes is home to an estimated 30,000 - 35,000 species of vascular plants, accounting for
about 10% of all the world's species and far surpassing the diversity of any other biodiversity hotspot. It
is also the world leader in plant endemism, with an estimated 50% (and perhaps 60% or more) of plant
species found nowhere else on Earth. This means that nearly seven percent of the world's vascular
plants are endemic to the 0.8% of the earth’s land area represented by the Tropical Andes.
The Tropical Andes also harbour more than 1 700 bird species, nearly 600 of which are endemic, a
level of endemism that is unequalled in the world. 66 bird genera are also endemic.
There are nearly 570 mammal species in the Tropical Andes; about 75 of these are endemic and nearly
70 are threatened. The region also has six endemic genera. Other large mammals found in the area
include the woolly or mountain tapir (Tapirus pinchaque), which is Endangered according to the IUCN
Red List, and the spectacled bear (Tremarctos ornatus), the only bear in South America, which is listed
as Vulnerable to extinction (IUCN 2004). Both of these highland species are likely to be affected by
deforestation for opium poppy cultivation.
More than 600 reptile species have been identified in the Tropical Andes, over 270 of which are
endemic, including those belonging to the three endemic genera. This level of endemism is unequalled
in the world for this class. The Andes is also the most important region in the world for amphibians in
terms of species diversity, with around 980 species and more than 670 endemics. Eight amphibian
genera are endemic to the Andes. The most speciose of these is the frog genus Telmatobius, with about
45 species. Many other non-endemic genera are highly speciose; the frog genus Eleutherodactylus has
more than 330 species, of which more than 250 are restricted to the Tropical Andes.
There are more than 375 documented species of freshwater fishes in the Tropical Andes, and it is likely
that many more will be found along the Amazonian flanks of the mountains. Of these, more than 130
are endemic.
Lowland Amazonian rain forests also contain very high levels of species richness. Lowland species
often have more widespread distributions than those of the mountain regions, so are less likely to be
threatened with extinction as a result of an equal area of deforestation.
The most important effect of illicit crop cultivation on biodiversity is the loss, fragmentation and
degradation of forest habitat. Complex ecological impacts have been reported wherever tropical
deforestation is studied (e.g. Cosson et al., 1999; Goosem, 2002; Laurance, et al., 1997). However,
there are very few Andean field data on biodiversity impacts (Fjeldsa et al., 2005). Only one relevant
site-specific study was found, in which:
“Thickets and forest fragments in the principal coca-growing district in the middle Huallaga valley in
Peru had a very impoverished avifauna – with almost total lack of genuine forest species and potential
game birds (Schellerup, cited in Fjeldsa et al., 2005).
A summary of the many effects of tropical deforestation and fragmentation on habitat degradation is
given in Steininger et al. (2001a). These effects include structural changes in forests near clearing
edges, such as increased tree mortality and large differences in temperature and humidity. This leads to
an increased potential for fire and a change in the regeneration niche, favouring pioneer tree species
over core forest species. Changes in faunal composition and reductions in diversity have been recorded
in forest fragments smaller than 5 km2. The composition of fauna such as leaf-litter insects, butterflies
37
and birds is affected as much as 250 m from clearing edges. These responses to small patch size and
edges are highly species-specific, with the range of edge effects varying from 50 to 250 m. Hunting
extends such effects up to 10 km into a forest.
As well as the direct habitat loss, wild animals are also affected by hunting by farmers for food and
perhaps for sale in local markets. Even light hunting pressures on large bird and mammal species in
tropical forests can have significant effects on forest ecology and structure (Robinson & Redford,
1994). Furthermore, Henkel (1995) found that with the arrival of coca processing in the Chapare region
of Bolivia, wildlife was smuggled on the narcotrafficking planes, involving mainly monkeys, reptiles
and birds, as well as other species hunted by for their skins. This has been the only report of this trade,
but it could well be happening in Peru and Colombia too.
The contamination of soils and water, from agrochemicals used in the production and eradication of the
crops and the chemicals for processing the products, are also likely to have significant local and
downstream impacts on biodiversity, but these have not been quantified.
Our knowledge of the impacts of illicit crops on biodiversity in the Andean region includes some
analyses of the distribution of birds in relation to coca cultivation and a few records from some sites,
but almost no site-level research. Here follows a summary of the findings of sites and species identified
as being affected in Colombia, Peru and Bolivia. Most conclusions are based on two regional analyses
and an analysis of priority sites for conservation in Peru.
One regional analysis was carried out by Fjeldsa et al. (2005), mapping on priority areas for
biodiversity conservation, based on the distribution of bird species in relation to areas with armed
conflicts and coca cultivation. They report that Andean areas with illicit crops overlap the distribution
of 1,950 bird species (67.3% of all South American resident land birds). Illicit crops are produced
through the entire range of variation in species richness and endemism in the Andean region, except for
the most species-poor parts.
Areas with high richness and high endemism are often identified as priorities for biodiversity
conservation. 39% of such grid cells in the Fjeldsa et al. (2005) analysis overlap by more than 20%
with coca growing areas. This compares with 20.4% of grid cells in the areas with low richness and
high endemism, 5.2% in areas where there are high richness and low endemism, and 8.2% in areas with
low richness and low endemism. Very similar patterns would emerge if bird species endemism was
replaced with numbers of threatened species (Fjeldsa et al. 2005).
A further regional analysis was conducted for the present study with the assistance of the UNODC
office in Peru, to identify those Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in the Andean region in which coca
cultivation was recorded in 2004. IBAs are sites identified according to standard criteria, which hold
significant numbers of one or more globally threatened bird species and/or are one of a set of sites that
hold a suite of restricted-range species or biome-restricted species (Birdlife International, 2005c). An
analysis of the 455 IBAs of the tropical Andes has just been published (Birdlife International, 2005b;
CI, 2005) and identifies a set of protected and unprotected sites of importance for biodiversity
conservation. The IBA boundaries were overlaid with the distribution of coca cultivation in 2004 to
estimate the area planted in each IBA.
Colombia
Álvarez (2002b) conducted a first assessment of illicit crops and bird conservation priorities in
Colombia. This has largely been superseded by the more comprehensive analysis of Fjeldsa et al.
(2005), which identified a minimum set of 89 areas in the Andean region required for a single
representation of all 987 bird species. Of these areas in Colombia, the most important are the
Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta in the northwest, with 12 endemic species and the presence of coca
cultivation, and the mountains of Tolima in central Colombia, with 8 endemic species and the
presence of opium poppy cultivation. It was found that coca and armed conflict could seriously
constrain the effectiveness of the Sierra de Perija (Perija Mountains) National Park for
conservation of Pyrrhura caeruleiceps and Pauxi pauxi guilliardi. Conservation actions are also
reported to be increasingly limited in South western Darien, (where bird species of conservation
interest include Crypturellus kerriae and especially Psarocolius cassini), Paramillo (Pyrrhura
38
Table 14: Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in Colombia with coca cultivation in 2004
Illicit
crops
Coca No. of recorde
IBA area, important d by
area 2004 bird Altitude Bird
IBA Region (ha) (ha) species (m) Life
Blade of San Lorenzo Guajira 58 000 99.3 23 0- 2400
La Forzosa - Santa Gertrudis Antioquia 9 000 1.8 15 1200- 1900
Santander and
Mountainous area of las Quinchas Cundinamarca 86 088 506.6 9 200 - 1700
Mountainous area of los 175
Yariguies Santander 000 80.4 12 2000- 3200
Mountainous area of Los 150
Churumbelos Cordillera Oriental 000 10.6 34 300- 3000
National Natural Park Los 150
Farallones Valle del Cauca 000 0.6 9 200 - 4100 x
National Natural Park Munchique Cauca 44 000 2.3 43 500 - 3020
Antioquia and 460
National Natural Park Paramillo Cordoba 000 120.7 6 500-3400 x
Boyacá, Casanare 306
Natural National Park El Cocuy and Arauca 000 0.3 2 600 - 3000
548
Natural National Park El Tuparro Vichada 000 2.0 5 100 - 330
Natural National Park
Sanquianga Nariño 89 000 0.3 2 0-20
Natural National Park Sierra de la 630 2
Macarena Meta 000 626.3 8 400 - 2500
Valley of San Salvador Guajira 58 000 242.2 23 0 - 2400 x
Western riberas of the Duda river Meta 17 000 6.2 7 350 - 400
Cerro Pintado Guajira 15 000 14 1500 - 3200 x
National Natural Park Las
Orquideas Antioquia 32 000 3 300-3850 x

El Oso Reserve Huila 5 500 5 1800 - 3600 x

These IBAs have been reported as threatened by illicit drug cultivation by BirdLife, but did not
contain coca in 2004. Opium poppy may have been present.
Source: Birdlife International (2005b) and UNODC Colombia (2005)
39
Map 5: Important bird areas and coca cultivation density in the Andean Region, 2005
80°W 70°W 60°
C olom biWa
Peru
C aribbean Sea
Bolivia
10°N
10°N
N AM A C atatum bo
PA South Am erica
N orte de
A ntioquia
VEN EZU ELA
Cauca
Atrato
G U YA N A
C O LO M B IA ta
na
^ Me
le
Magda
d a
Bogota Vicha
v iare
Gua
M eta -
G uaviare
N ariño
Putum ayo -
C aqueta
0°
0°
Caq
u eta
EC U A D O R Pu
t um
ay
o
Amazon
B R A ZIL
Ma
ra
ñon
Uc
Hu
ay
al
ali
A lto
lag
a
H uallaga
10°S
10°S
r us
Pu
PER U
io s
Uru
En
La C onvencion dre de D
b
e
am
Lim a ^ A purim ac
ba
a
Mamore
and Lares M
Gua
Ene p are
Pacific Apu
i
Ben
r ima
c
O cean
Yungas
Titica
Lakcae
^ C hapare
C ultivation density La Paz
(ha/km 2) B O LIVIA
0.1 -1.0
1.1 -4.0
> 4.0
20°S
20°S
Im portant
bird areas Pilc
om ayo
International PA R A G U A Y
boundaries 0 250 500
D epartm ent G eographic coordinates W G S 84

km
C H ILE
boundaries A R G EN TIN A
80°W 70°W 60°W
Sources:G overnm ents ofBolivia,C olom bia y Peru, N ationalm onitoring system s supported by U N O D C
The boundaries and nam es show n and the designations used on this m ap do notim ply officialendorsem entoracceptance by the U nited N ations
40
subandina), and Choco (E. mirabilis and H. negreti). Conflict is also evident in the Serrania de
San Lucas (Crax alberti), at the head of the Magdalena Valley (Tinamotis osgoodi, Atlapetes
fuscoolivaceus, and Scytalopus sp.) and in the Eastern Andean Slope (Grallaria kaestneri).
The areas of frontier agriculture in the lowlands of eastern Colombia, where much new coca
cultivation is found, are not particularly rich in bird species or unique compared to the Andean
highlands (Fjeldsa et al., 2005).
“This is not meant to devalue such forests, but rather to emphasize that the regional species pool
is likely to persist in spite of local habitat loss” (Fjeldsa et al., 2005).
However, Fjeldsa et al. (2005) suggest that even fairly widespread species may be affected if large
portions of their range lie in armed-conflict zones. Bird species in this situation include the two
large green macaws, Ara ambigua and Ara militaris, and possibly for Crypturellus duidae
(Macarena Mountains population), Odontophorus atrifrons (Santa Marta to Santander), western
Colombian populations of Chloropipo flavicapilla, Dacnis hartlaubi, Penelope perspicax, and the
north Colombian endemics Chlorochrysa nitidissima, Clytoctantes alixii, Leptotila cassini,
Pionopsitta pyrilia, and (especially) Habia gutturalis.
Fourteen Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in Colombia contained some areas of coca cultivation in
2004 (Table 16), although nine of these had ten hectares or less of coca. The Natural National Park
Sierra de la Macarena in Meta province was the most severely affected IBA, with 2,626 hectares
of coca in 2004. The second largest area, 506 hectares, was found in the Mountainous Area of Las
Quinchas IBA.
Peru
Peru is an extremely diverse country with both high species richness and endemism (Rodríguez &
Young, 2000). The high levels of endemism in Ecuador and Peru are broadly associated with
montane and arid conditions produced by the high mountain ranges that subdivide each country.
Peru’s biodiversity is also augmented by contact with floras from more temperate latitudes (Young
et al., 2002).
Biodiversity is under pressure from coca cultivation in the centre of upper Huallaga Valley, within
the Tingo, Maria and Taparoto areas, where very little natural habitat is left. Other highly affected
areas are in the Palcazu – Pichis district and in areas with logging and colonization along the
Huancayo-Satipo-La Merced – Pucallpa road and along the lower Apurimac river. The traditional
coca cultivation in the submontane Zone of Cuzco has also become more intense (Fjeldsa et al.,
2005).
Conservation options are limited in the Marañon River and in the middle Huallaga as coca
cultivation areas expand, with biologically important sites in Cordillera of Colán, Abra Patricia
and Moyobamba (bird species of concern being Xenoglaux loweryi, Grallaria blakei, Grallaricula
ochraceifrons, Picumnus steindachneri, Herpsilochmus parkeri, Zimmerius vallerejoi,
Hemitriccus cinnamomeipectus, Poecilotriccus luluae, Henicorhina leucoptera, and Loddigesia,
mirabilis in the adjacent Utcubamba basin). Fjeldsa et al., (2005) consider that the coca districts in
the Upper Huallaga and Pachitea-Aguaytia and other areas in Pasco and Junin do not seem to raise
particular conservation concern.
The coca-related activities in Cuzco are just to the north of the core areas for endemic bird species
in the Cordilleras Vilcanota and Velcabamba, but conservation options may still be somewhat
constrained for the bird species Amazilia viridicauda, Grallaria erythroleuca, and Thryothorus
eisenmanni (Fjeldsa et al., 2005).
Rodríguez and Young (2000) identified national level priority areas for biodiversity conservation
in Peru, based on the distributions of mammals, birds, fish, amphibians, reptiles, invertebrates and
vascular plants. Thirty-eight priority areas were identified (Figure 9). Comparison of these areas
with coca cultivation in Peru in 2004 (UNODC Peru, 2005) indicates that several of these areas
are affected. The Alto Huallaga region of coca is located in the northern section of the
Huacrachuco-Huamachuco priority area and adjacent to the Cordillera Azul-El Diablo area, both
of which are considered unprotected. The Oxapampa-Chanchumayo area is affected at its southern
end by the Apurimac-Ene coca region. The La Convencion and Lares coca region lies within the
41
Vilcanota priority conservation area. The Inambari Tambopata coca region is within the
Tambopata-Heath priority conservation area.
None of the Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in Peru have been reported by BirdLife to be threatened
by illicit drug cultivation, but spatial analysis indicates that five IBAs included areas of coca
cultivation in 2004. Of these, the Cordillera Vilcanota Norte - Abra Málaga-Vilcanota IBA was
the most affected by a large margin, containing 4,351 hectares of coca in 2004 (12% of the IBA’s
area).
Table 15: Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in Peru with coca cultivation in 2004
No. of
IBA area Coca area, 2004
IBA Region important bird Altitude (m)
(ha) (ha)
species
Bajo Madidi 7.5
Balsas Amazonas 6 200 94.4 6 850 - 2900
Cordillera Vilcanota Norte - Abra
Málaga-Vilcanota Cusco 35 200 4 351.5 30 3000 - 4200
Hacienda Limón Cajamarca 10 000 12.4 6 900 - 2700
Maruncunca Puno 57 100 241.2 7 1500 - 2800
Parque Nacional Tingo María Huánuco 4 777 14.9 2 650 - 1849
Source: Birdlife International (2005b) and UNODC Peru (2005).
Bolivia
The priority area in Bolivia for conservation of endemic Andean bird species is Cocapata at the
Cochabamba-La Paz boundary, with eleven restricted range species. This area includes the Isiboro
Sécure National Park, where coca cultivation increased in the north of the Chapare region between
2003 and 2004. Clearing for coca cultivation could seriously limit conservation options for the
bird species Pauxi unicornis and Terenura sharpei (Fjeldsa et al., 2005).
Seven Bolivian IBAs contained some coca cultivation in 2004 (Table 18). Of these, the Bajo
Carrasco IBA in the Cochabamba region has been most seriously affected, with 1,286 hectares of
coca in 2004. The Apolo IBA contained 250 hectares, the second largest area of coca in 2004.
Table 16: Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in Bolivia with coca cultivation in 2004
No. of Illicit crops
IBA area Coca area, important recorded by
IBA Region (ha) 2004 (ha) bird species Altitude (m) BirdLife
Apolo La Paz 200 000 250.8 3 1500 – 2500

Alto Madidi –(Yungas
Superiores de Madidi) La Paz 200 000 4.7 50 1500 – 3600
Alto Apolobamba -
Apolobamba La Paz 483 743 0.2 81 2000-4000
Cristal Mayu y Alrededores Cochabamba 40 000 90.5 4 1000-2000
Bajo Carrasco Cochabamba 470 000 1 286.5 6 800-2000 x
Bajo Isiboro-Sécure -Yungas x
Inferiores de Isiboro- Beni,
Sécure/Altamachi Cochabamba 250 000 160.2 10 800-2000
Alto Mosetenes y Cocapata -
Yungas Superiores de
Mosetenes y Cocapata Cochabamba 350 000 1.1 44 1800-3000
Source: Birdlife International (2005b) and UNODC Bolivia (2005).
42
Effects of illicit drug cultivation on local people
Human health
This study did not identify any field-based research on the direct effects of illicit drug cultivation
on farmers’ health. Probably the most significant health risk is from direct exposure to growers
and processors of the large quantities of agrochemicals used in the production of cocaine and
opium, followed by potential contamination of food and water supplies by these chemicals.
Although some of these substances are highly toxic to mammals and might have serious
environmental consequences, accurate information on the quantities used, frequency of application
and conditions of use is not available. There is no evidence to separate the effects that could be
attributed to illicit crop production from those produced as a result of legal farming, mining and
infrastructure development that accompanies the settlement of new tropical forest areas.
Migration, violence and insecure conditions and land use change involving coca
The widespread violence in Colombia with the involvement of different armed groups has
undoubtedly played an important role in the location and mobility of illicit crops (Dávalos, 2001),
with consequent effects on deforestation and environmental degradation. The main incentives for
growing illicit crops are economic, but growers in Colombia may also be forced at gunpoint
(Álvarez, 2001a; Fjeldsa et al., 2005), as paramilitary and left-wing guerrilla groups are involved
in trafficking to varying degrees. In Peru, the leftist guerrilla movement Sendero Luminoso
(Shining Path) has also been involved in coca production, in the Selva Alta (Fjeldsa et al., 2005).
Ferro et al. (1999) describe the social transformation in areas under intensive cultivation in
Colombia from the perspective of young people. In the colonization process, some farmers had
received incentives from the government to convert forest into grassland for ranching and
household cultivation. The typical methods employed are unregulated timber exploitation
followed by grass monoculture. As more farmers continue to arrive, deforestation intensifies. As
coca is more profitable than any other economic activity, many farmers have chosen to change
from cattle ranching to coca plantations. The coca crops do generate enough income for the settled
farmers to remove their need to cut more forest, but that same income attracts new farmers,
resulting in increasing deforestation.
In Colombia lowland indigenous groups such as the Korebaju (nomads until 50 years ago) and
Ingas have experienced an increase conflicts over land ownership, both between themselves and
with the new farmers. Indigenous people are often involved in coca production as the raspachines
(leaf harvesters).
In Bolivia, road blockages and demonstrations by coca growers against eradication programs are
fairly common. Although there is a tradition of coca cultivation, it has been reported that many of
the coca growers in Chapare, Bolivia, consider themselves temporary inhabitants of the area,
seeing their real home as their birthplaces in the Andes mountains (Mansilla, 1994 in Thoumi,
2001). On the basis of interviews, it was concluded that migration to the area would have
happened anyway, but that coca accelerated the process.
Effects of illicit drug eradication on the environment and local people

Current eradication policy in Colombia aims to make illicit crop cultivation and narcotic
production less attractive. The aim is to diminish the supply of cocaine and heroine, leading to an
increase in prices and subsequent decrease in consumption. The methods employed include crop
eradication, cargo interception, arrest and imprisonment, equipment confiscation, and confiscation
of any products of drug trafficking. Central to this strategy is the aerial spraying of the herbicide
glyphosate (‘Roundup’) to eradicate coca and opium poppy, as well as manual eradication. There
is no use of any biological control agents, such as fungus, because of the risk of damaging
surrounding ecosystems (Diaz-Torres, 2002). The Colombian government has set restrictions on
the use of aerial spraying, including limits to the proximity to human communities and its
application only under certain climatic conditions (Moya, 2005). Only coca crops that are
considered commercial, that is areas over 3 hectares in extent, are fumigated. Cultivation areas
43
smaller than 3 hectares are eradicated manually. It has been argued that since aerial fumigation the
size of coca plots has decreased (Diaz-Torres, 2002).
Peru and Bolivia do not use aerial spraying. In Peru, the only eradication of coca fields is
manually conducted, without the use of chemicals. Similarly, in Bolivia, only manual eradication
is carried out.
Solomon et al. (2005) conducted a study on the effects on human health and the environment of
aerial spraying of glyphosate herbicide for the illicit crops eradication programme in Colombia,
based on a review of literature. It was found the formulation of glyphosate used could produce
temporary irritation in eyes and skin, but no effects on reproduction were observed. No ecological
field data were collected from the region, but a review found that glyphosate had low toxicity to
non-target organisms other than plants. The formulation used in the eradication programme in
Colombia is of low toxicity for mammals and vertebrates, although some temporary impacts may
occur. Amphibians are the group most sensitive to this formulation, and it has been suggested that
other formulations be tested when eradication is conducted near to water bodies, in order to
minimise impacts on amphibian populations (Solomon et al., 2005). Relyea (2005) tested the
impacts of glyphosate on amphibians and concluded that it could cause high rates of mortality in
larval stages and lead to population decline.
There appear to have been no systematic field studies on the possibility of loss of forest from
unintended drift of glyphosate during aerial spraying. Cavelier and Etter (1995) reported that
opium poppy fumigation was very accurate and that the effects on adjacent ecosystems would be
low compared with the removal of the entire forest for opium poppy cultivation. The effects of
drifting spray could be greater when fumigation occurs at night or in windy conditions (Álvarez,
2001a; Dávalos, 2001; Salaman et al., 2001). The Andean relief and other factors not permitting
fumigation to be conducted at the specified altitude of 10 m could also increase the area affected.
Guio (2003), in his study in Samaniego, Nariño (Colombia), reports that aerial fumigation of
poppy crops also affect household crops and alternative crops promoted by UNODC.
Intensification of fumigation has lead to an increase in complaints to the Defensoria del Pueblo
regarding impacts on farmers’ health, domestic animals, fishes and legal crops. Ortiz et al. (2004),
in an essay about agriculture, illicit crops and the environment for the National Environmental
Forum (Colombia), mentions that recent studies in Putumayo have concluded that more than 2,700
hectares of licit crops, including fruits, and more than 200,000 fish, were lost because of
fumigations. These figures are for people that submitted their cases to local authorities.
Velaidez (2001) visited the Municipality of Cartagena de Chaira in the Department of Caquetá
between November 1998 and February 1999 to investigate the impact of aerial fumigation on
farmers and their crops. This study reported unintended effects of aerial glyphosate spraying but
no quantitative data, with affects on rubber and cocoa plantations and food crops such as plantain,
maize, yucca, rice, vegetables and fruits. Cattle were reported to lose hair after eating pastures
previously affected by the fumigation. The death of young chickens and farmed fish was reported
as a result of related water contamination.
Issues for analysis of the environmental effects of illicit drug cultivation

in the Andes
Drug cultivation practices and farming systems

Bolivia and Peru have areas where coca has been traditionally grown for local use of coca leaf, in
the Yungas and the Huallaga valley, as well as very limited cultivation by some indigenous groups
in Colombia. In these areas there is relevant traditional knowledge that includes soil conservation
techniques such as terracing. Although some authors suggest that such practices are in decline, the
environmental impact of coca in terms of forest clearance and land degradation, appears to be
moderate. It is in the areas of coca cultivation for cocaine in Bolivia, Peru and all of Colombia that
the absence of soil conservation measures and intense use of agrochemicals have a considerable
negative impact on the immediate environment. The illegal nature of the crop and the eradication
measures are strong disincentives for farmers to invest in soil conservation and other measures to
44
promote the sustainability of this land use. In Colombia in particular, there is a very high mobility
and short life of coca plots.
Some researchers have expressed the view that coca is a suitable crop for the tropical humid forest
biome, because coca plants adapt very well to the infertile soils, and are more productive than
other crops studied (e.g. Salm & Liberman, 1997; Morales, 1990). This may be the case for small-
scale producers, but would only be relevant if conditions favoured long-term investment in a coca
plot. The crop’s illegality in most regions and subsequent eradication measures do not favour this
investment.
The economic role of coca income for farmers is of more relevance to analysis of the
environmental impact of coca cultivation. Notwithstanding the illegal nature of coca/cocaine and
opium/heroin production, several authors express the view that the high profitability of illegal
coca or opium poppy compared to other land exploitation activities could limit farmers’ impact on
natural resources, requiring smaller areas for production than other land uses (Andrade et al.,
2004; Henkel, 1995; Laserna, 1999; Thoumi, 2001). This may be the case for the small-scale
farmers of Chapare and in situations of relatively stable communities or secure land tenure.
However, for larger scale producers, like many of those found in Colombia, the expansion of coca
cultivation is driven by maximising income rather than subsistence needs.
In Colombia, Peru and Bolivia, coca farming could be broadly classified into two broad
categories, in terms of its impact on forest. One category is in areas that have already been
populated or colonization is encouraged, and so farming of some form is already established. In
this case, any new coca cultivation is likely to be from conversion of existing farmland or
secondary forest, as well from clearance of remaining fragments of forest. This was reported to be
the case in the Chapare, Bolivia in the 1990s (Henkel, 1995). In Colombia during 2000 to 2004
about a third of new coca cultivation was on land nearly cleared from primary forest (Table 10),
with the remaining two thirds from secondary vegetation and crops or pasture. This indicates that
the replanting of eradicated coca plots and the establishment of new plots is often in areas already
colonized and farmed.
The other category is where new coca cultivation is being established in previously unpopulated
areas, opening up a new agricultural frontier. Rather than existing settlers adding coca to the suite
of activities already undertaken, whole new settlements are established. This has been the case
over much of the Colombian Amazonian region, and on a smaller scale in Peru and the Chapare
and Apolo regions of Bolivia. The environmental impact of coca plots in these areas of
colonization is much greater than in already settled lands, because of the associated deforestation
for food crops, pasture, infrastructure and transport, and the hunting of wildlife.
Illicit drug processing

The chemicals used in the processing of coca leaf to cocaine, and of opium latex to heroin, are
thought to have a much greater impact on the environment than the agrochemicals used in their
production. Each year millions of tons and litres of processing chemicals and materials are
released into the environment, both as wastes from processing laboratories and from the
destruction of confiscated chemicals. However, only one specific study on the environmental
effects of these chemicals has been identified, that conducted in the Chapare region of Bolivia in
1992 (Southwest Research Associates, 1993, cited by Henkel, 1995). Here, chemical spills were
quickly diluted by the high rainfall received in the region. Some loss of soil microorganisms was
noted, but no damage to wildlife, vegetation, fish species or bird life was detected in areas near the
processing laboratories.
The discharge of chemicals from illicit drug processing undoubtedly has some environmental
impact, but it is impossible to assess the scale of this impact due to the lack of data of almost any
kind on soils, water supplies or biodiversity or the health of local people.
Impacts on biodiversity
The most important effect of illicit crop cultivation on biodiversity is the loss, fragmentation and
degradation of forest habitat, as well as local hunting of wildlife. However, there are almost no
field data with which to assess these effects. In Colombia, the scale of deforestation and
45
fragmentation of tropical and Andean forests due to coca cultivation has certainly had major
impacts on the country’s biodiversity. The impact is more localised in Peru and Bolivia due to the
more restricted regions of coca cultivation. Fjeldsa et al. (2005) have identified the sites and bird
species most likely to be affected in each country. An analysis carried out for the present study
complements this work by identifying Important Bird Areas in which coca is cultivated.
The centres of species endemism, which make the Andes one of the most biodiverse regions of the
world, are generally found at altitudes higher than the preferred conditions for growing coca. This
reduces the probability of species extinction as a result to coca cultivation, because lowland
species typically have wider distributions.
Aerial fumigation and forced eradication of coca crops is one factor in the dynamics of coca
cultivation and deforestation. Several studies report that in response to coca eradication measures
farmers have been deforesting new plots in more remote areas. These new plots can be in the local
region or in other parts of the country, since migration and displacement of people is widespread,
especially in Colombia. It has also been suggested that farmers create more scattered plots of
smaller size in response to fumigation. This further fragments the forest and increases the impact
on biodiversity. The relative importance of this phenomenon compared to the other drivers of coca
cultivation and deforestation have not been determined.
Moya (2005), in a statistical modelling exercise, concluded that forced eradication policies have
an ambiguous effect on the area of coca cultivated. Fumigation increases the risks and costs of
growing the crops and so discourages coca cultivation, whilst at the same time increasing
production costs and consequently market prices, which in turn encourage cultivation (unless
complementary interdiction measures keep market prices low). The impacts of eradication are
uncertain and depend on the interaction and magnitude of many aspects, including the types of
farmers involved as well as those involved in the trade of coca leaf.
46
PART 3. BOLIVIA COCA CULTIVATION SURVEY
Bolivia Coca Survey for 2005
FACT SHEET – BOLIVIA COCA SURVEY FOR 2005
Variation
2004 2005
on 2004
Coca cultivation 27,700 ha -8% 25,400 ha
Of which in the Yungas of La Paz 17,300 ha +5% 18,100 ha
in Chapare 10,100 ha - 31 % 7,000 ha
in Apolo 300 ha 0% 300 ha
Of which permitted by Bolivian law 1008 12,000 ha 12,000 ha
non-permitted by Bolivian law 1008 15,700 ha - 14% 13,400 ha
Of which in national parks 4,100 ha -52 % 1,950 ha
Average annual sun-dried coca leaf yield
in Chapare 2,764 kg/ha 2,764 kg/ha
in the Yungas outside traditional
1,798 kg/ha 1,798 kg/ha
coca growing areas
in Apolo and the Yungas, traditional
936 kg/ha 936 kg/ha
coca growing areas
Production of coca leaf 49,000 mt 42,000 mt
Maximum potential production of cocaine 107 mt - 16 % 90 mt
in percent of global cocaine production 11% 10%
National weighted average farm-gate price of coca
5.0 US$/kg - 14 % 4.3 US$/kg
leaf (outside state market)
Chapare average farm-gate price of coca leaf 5.2 US$/kg - 27 % 4.1 US$/kg
Total farm-gate value of coca leaf production US$ 240 million - 25 % US$ 180 million
GDP US$ 8.11billion + 4.6% US$ 8.42billion
Farm-gate value of coca leaf production in
3.0 % 2.1 %
percent of GDP
Value of agricultural sector n.a. n.a. US$ 1.5 billion
Farm-gate value of coca leaf production in
12 %
percent of value of 2003 agricultural sector
Reported seizure of cocaine paste 8,189 kg + 14% 9,350 kg
Reported seizure of cocaine hydrochloride 531 kg + 145% 1,300 kg
1
GDP of 2004 estimated from the 2003 GDP, and with a projected growth of 3.8% (source: INE)
2
GDP of 2005 estimated from the 2004 GDP, and with a projected growth of 4.6% (source: IINAC)
51
Abbreviations
Bs. Bolivianos
CONALTID Bolivian National Council for Fighting against Drugs
GIS Geographical Information Systems
GPS Global Positioning System
GCP Ground Control Point
ICMP UNODC Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme
UNODC United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
DIGECO Bolivian National Direction of Coca Leaf Control
DIRECO National Direction of Agricultural Re-conversion (up to 2005)
FELCN Special Force against Drug Trafficking
The following organizations and individuals contributed to the implementation of the 2005 coca
cultivation survey in Bolivia and to the preparation of the present report:
Government of Bolivia:
x Vice-Ministry for Coca and Integral Development
x National Direction of DIRECO (renamed Direction of Development for the Coca Growing Areas
as of 2006)
UNODC:
x Ivan Alfaro - Chief Technical Advisor (Project)

x Robert Szucs - GIS Specialist (Project)
x Patricia Delgado - GIS Specialist (Project)
x Gonzalo Aruquipa - Remote Sensing Specialist (Project)
x Rafael Joffré - Remote Sensing Specialist (Project)
x Blanca Vega – Remote Sensing Specialist (Project)
x Claudia Ortega - Administrative Assistant (Project)
x José Manuel Martinez - Morales - UNODC Representative (field office)

x José Rocabado - UNODC National Programme Officer (field office)
x Coen Bussink, Remote Sensing and GIS expert (UNODC – Research and Analysis Section)
x Denis Destrebecq, Regional Expert (UNODC – Research and Analysis Section - ICMP)
x Anja Korenblik, Programme Manager (UNODC – Research and Analysis Section - ICMP)
x Thibault le Pichon, Chief (UNODC – Research and Analysis Section)
x Thomas Pietschmann, Research Officer (UNODC-Research and Analysis Section)
x Martin Raithelhuber, Programme Officer (UNODC-Research and Analysis Section)
x Javier Teran, Statistician (UNODC – Research and Analysis Section – ICMP)
As of 2006, the Bolivian Government used new denominations for some institutions. In this report,
the former denomination is still used for the institutions that participated in the survey activities
during year 2005.
The implementation of UNODC’s Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme in the Andean countries and
the Bolivia survey in 2005 was made possible thanks to financial contributions from the
Governments of the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, France and
Austria.
Pictures: UNODC BOL/F57 or otherwise indicated.
52
TABLE OF CONTENT
1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 55
2 FINDINGS................................................................................................................................................ 57
2.1 COCA CULTIVATION ............................................................................................................................ 57
2.2 REGIONAL ANALYSIS........................................................................................................................... 60
2.1.1 Coca cultivation in the Yungas of La Paz ................................................................................ 62
2.1.2 Coca cultivation in Apolo ......................................................................................................... 73
2.1.3 Coca cultivation in Chapare..................................................................................................... 75
2.3 COCA YIELD AND PRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 81
2.4 COCA PRICES AND TRADING ............................................................................................................... 83
2.5 COCA CULTIVATION AND RELATED ISSUES ............................................................................................ 92
2.1.4 Coca cultivation and land use...................................................................................................... 92
2.1.5 Coca cultivation and alternative development projects ............................................................... 94
2.1.6 Coca cultivation in National Parks ............................................................................................... 96
2.6 REPORTED ERADICATION ................................................................................................................... 97
2.7 REPORTED SEIZURE........................................................................................................................... 99
Index of maps
Map 1: Coca cultivation density, Bolivia, 2005 ....................................................................................... 56

Map 2: Coca cultivation change 2004-2005, Bolivia ............................................................................... 59
Map 3: Coca cultivation density, for the Yungas of La Paz and Apolo, Bolivia 2005 ......................... 61
Map 4: Coca cultivation density for Chapare, Bolivia 2005 ................................................................... 74
Map 5: Coca leaf trading authorized by DIGECO, 2005.......................................................................... 85
Map 6: Coca leaf trading authorized by DIGECO, change 2004 - 2005................................................. 86
Map 7: Land use and coca cultivation, Bolivia 2005 .............................................................................. 91
Map 8: Coca cultivation and alternative development projects, Bolivia 2005 ..................................... 93
Map 9: Coca cultivation and National Parks, Bolivia 2005 .................................................................... 95
53
Sajta River in the Cochabamba Tropics
Coca cultivation on high slopes near the town of Coripata, Yungas

of La Paz
The town of Shinahota, at the municipality of Tiraqué, Cochabamba Tropics
54
1 INTRODUCTION
The objectives of UNODC’s Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme (ICMP) are to establish
methodologies for the collection and analysis of data on illicit crops and to improve Governments’
capacity to monitor illicit crops in the context of the strategy adopted by Member States at the
General Assembly Special Session on Drugs in June 1998. ICMP is currently active in seven
countries: Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, Afghanistan, Myanmar, Laos and Morocco.
The Bolivian Government and UNODC launched the project “Land use management and
monitoring system in the Yungas of La Paz” in October 2001. Initially, the project focused only on
the Yungas of La Paz, but since 2003 it has extended its scope to include the provision of
estimates on coca cultivation at the national level. This report presents the project’s findings and
methodology for 2005.
The project was implemented in 2005 in cooperation with the National Direction of Development,
for the Coca Growing Regions, the Vice-Ministry of Coca and Integral Development. At the
beginning of 2006, DIRECO was replaced by the new Direction of Development for the Coca
Growing Regions. DIRECO provided logistical support during the implementation of ground
activities, including the collection of a large number of ground control points, mainly in the Chapare
area. The Bolivian National Government, through the National Council of Fight against Illicit
Trafficking of Drugs (CONALTID) is also relying on the information provided by this project for
planning and implementing its strategy for the fight against illicit drug trafficking.
Coca cultivation decreased significantly in Bolivia at the end of the 1990s, following a reduction of
coca cultivation in the Chapare region. Bolivia is now the third largest coca producer worldwide, far
behind Colombia and Peru. Coca cultivation is concentrated in the departments of La Paz (in the
areas of the Yungas of La Paz and Apolo) and in the Chapare area (department of Cochabamba).
Bolivian Law 1008 (“Law on the Regime Applicable to Coca and Controlled Substances”, 1988)
permits up to 12,000 ha of traditional coca cultivation for traditional consumption and other legal
uses. Most of this area is located in the Yungas of La Paz. In October 2004, the Bolivia
Government also temporarily authorized the cultivation of 3,200 ha of coca in the Chapare region.
Law No 1008 does not provide a precise definition of the geographic limits of the traditional coca
growing areas, but the Bolivian Government is preparing a study which is intended to lead to legal
delineations of the areas where coca for traditional use will be cultivated.
The National Government is also planning to develop a study to determine the licit national
demand for coca leaf.
55
Map 1: Coca cultivation density, Bolivia, 2005
65°W 60°W
Bolivia
Mad er a
10°S
10°S
SOUTH AMERICA
!
BRAZIL
Cobija Pando Di
os
de
d re
Ma
Ri o
Iten
ez
e ni
oB
Ri
Ri o
Beni
PERU
Ma
mor
Apolo
e
!
15°S
15°S
Trinidad
La Paz
Tit Yungas
ic aca
lak
e
Chapare
^La Paz
Cochabamba
!
Santa Cruz
Cochabamba
!
! Santa Cruz
Oruro
Oruro
Poopo lake
!
Sucre
!
Potosi
20°S
20°S
Chuquisaca
Potosi
Ri
!Tarija
o
Pi
Tarija
lco
ma
yo
PA R A G U AY
CHILE
Cultivation density
(ha/km² )
0.1 - 1
1.1 - 4.0
ARGENTINA
>4
25°S
25°S
0 150 300 km Department boundaries

1:8,000,000 Yun... : Coca growing areas
65°W 60°W

56
2 FINDINGS
2.1 COCA CULTIVATION
In 2005, the total area under coca cultivation in Bolivia was estimated to be 25,400 ha, a decrease
of 8% over last year’s estimate of 27,700 ha. The decrease at the national level was due to the
decrease in the Chapare region, where coca cultivation decreased by 31% between 2004 and
2005. The decrease in Chapare was attributed to the compliance of the farmers to the agreement
of October 2004 between the Government and coca growers federation, limiting coca cultivation to
0.16 ha by family. Unlike what happened before the agreement, the eradication efforts that took
place in 2005 in Chapare were not followed by replanting of the coca fields, thus resulting in a net
decrease in coca cultivation in the region.
Figure 1. Coca cultivation in Bolivia, 1995 – 2005 (ha)
50000
40000
30000
hectares
20000
10000
0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Sources United States Department of States National Monitoring System Supported by UNODC
Table 1. Coca cultivation in Bolivia, 1995– 2005 (ha)

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Rounded
48,600 48,100 45,800 38,000 21,800 14,600 19,900 21,600 23,600 27,700 25,400
total
Sources United States Department of State National Monitoring System Supported by UNODC
57
At the global level, the decreases in Bolivia and Peru were offset by the increase in Colombia, and
coca cultivation remained almost unchanged between 2004 and 2005. Coca cultivation in Bolivia
represented 16% of the global coca cultivation in 2005, compared to 17% in 2004. Bolivia
remained the third coca cultivator, behind Colombia and Peru.
Figure 2. Coca cultivation in the Andean region, 1995 – 2005 (ha)

250,000
200,000
150,000
hectares
100,000
50,000
0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Table 2. Coca cultivation in the Andean region, 1995- 2005 (ha)

%
change
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
2004-
2005
Bolivia 48,600 48,100 45,800 38,000 21,800 14,600 19,900 21,600 23,600 27,700 25,400 -8%
Peru 115,300 94,400 68,800 51,000 38,700 43,400 46,200 46,700 44,200 50,300 48,200 -4%
Colombia 50,900 67,200 79,400 101,800 160,100 163,300 144,800 102,000 86,000 80,000 86,000 +8%
Total 214,800 209,700 194,000 190,800 220,600 221,300 210,900 170,300 153,800 158,000 159,600 + 1%
58
2.2 REGIONAL ANALYSIS
The decrease in coca cultivation at the national level was entirely due to a decrease in coca
cultivation in the Chapare region from 10,100 ha to 7,000 ha, or -31%, between 2004 and 2005.
The decrease in Chapare was attributed to the compliance of the farmers to the agreement of
October 2004 between the Government and coca growers federation, limiting coca cultivation to
0.16 ha by family. Unlike what happened before the agreement, the eradication efforts that took
place in 2005 in Chapare were not followed by replanting of the coca fields, thus resulting in a net
decrease in coca cultivation. This could been seen on the satellite image, as shown on figure 12.
Coca cultivation in the Yungas increased by 5% between 2004 and 2005 to reach 18,100 ha,
remaining the most important region for coca cultivation in Bolivia, accounting for 71% of the total
cultivation in 2005.
Table 3. Coca cultivation estimates by region, 2002 – 2005 (ha)

% change 2004-
Region 2002 2003 2004 2005 % of 2005 total
2005
Yungas of La Paz 13,800 16,200 17,300 18,100 5% 71%
Chapare n.a. 7,300 10,100 7,000 -31% 28%
Apolo n.a. 50 300 300 0% 1%
Country total 23,550 27,700 25,400 -8% 100%
Figure 3. Coca cultivation estimates by region, 2002 – 2005 (ha)

20000
18000
16000
14000
12000
hectare
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Yungas of La Paz Chapare Apolo
2002 2003 2004 2005
Figure 4. Distribution of coca cultivation in Bolivia by region, 2005
Apolo
1%
Chapare
28%
Yungas of La
Paz
71%
60
Map 3: Coca cultivation density, for the Yungas of La Paz and Apolo, Bolivia 2005
68°30'W 68°0'W 67°30'W 67°0'W
ma
Santa Rosa
cu
BRAZIL
Río Ya
Reyes
U
PE R
San Buenaventura
Bo l i v i a
Cochabamba
14°30'S
14°30'S
Ecia. Pata
&
Río Tuichi PARAGUAY
CHILE
I
EN
Apolo ARG EN TIN A
OB
RI
Apolo
Río
&
Apolo
Q
Rurrenabaque
uen
d
eq u
Beni
e
15°0'S
15°0'S
San Borja
Charazani (Gral.Perez)
Río
Q
uiq
Río Ca
m
uib
ata
ey
Río
Ayata
M
aniq
ui
Tacacoma
ta Guanay
Co nsa Ka
ka Palos Blancos
Río Guanay Río
15°30'S
Pto. Linares
15°30'S
&
&
RIO Palos Blancos

AL
&
Tipuani TO
BE
NI
Sorata
Rí
Caranavi
o
La Paz
Co
roi
co
Caranavi
&
o
ong
Z
Río
Río
Sa
nta
Río
E le n
Yungas a
B
16°0'S
oop
16°0'S
i
Achacachi
Morochata
La Asunta
La Asunta & Cochabamba
Batallas Coroico
Coroico
&
Coripata
Arapata Tam
i
nduav & a mp
aya
Rio U Coripata
Río Cotaca
&
Pucarani
Chulumani
Yanacachi Chulumani
&
jes
&
Cultivation density El Alto Yanacachi

16°30'S
(ha/km² ) Irupana
16°30'S
^La Paz &

z
Irupana Pa
0.1 - 1.0
o La
Laja Lambate Rí
1.1 - 2.0 &
Achocalla Cajuata Inquisivi
2.1 - 4.0 Palca Cajuata
&
4.1 - 8.0 Cohoni
Mecapaca &
Viacha
> 8.0 Tirata
&
Department boundaries Río

Sap Cairoma Quime
Municipality boundaries a qui
Calamarca
Main Road
Comanche Sapahaqui
River
Caquiaviri Colquencha
Cochabamba
17°0'S
0 25 50 km
^
17°0'S
Department capital Malla Independencia

& Village center Ayo Ayo Geographic coordinates,Luribay
WGS 1984
68°30'W 68°0'W 1 :1.200.000 67°30'W 67°0'W

61
2.1.1 Coca cultivation in the Yungas of La Paz
The Yungas of La Paz, situated at about 150 km from the city of La Paz, is a region of uneven
relief with steep slopes, turbulent rivers and elevations ranging from 300 to 4,000 meters above
sea level. Significant climatic variations are observed even over short distances. Coca bush is
predominantly cultivated on narrow terraces built on high gradient hills.
Coca cultivation in the municipality of Caranavi
The survey revealed 18,100 ha of coca cultivation in the Yungas of La Paz in 2005, representing
an increase of 5% compared with the 17,300 ha found in 2004. Most of the cultivation continued to
take place in the provinces of South Yungas and North Yungas, accounting respectively for 52%
and 35% of the regional total. The largest annual increase (11%) was observed in Caranavi
province, but this province only accounted for 8% of the regional total in 2005. It has been the third
consecutive annual increase observed by the monitoring project in the Yungas of La Paz. Between
2002 and 2005 coca cultivation increased by 31% in this region.
Table 4. Distribution of coca cultivation in the Yungas of La Paz, 2002-2005 (ha)

% change % of 2005
Province 2002 2003 2004 2005
2004-2005 total
South Yungas 7,182 8,356 8,867 9,395 6% 52%
North Yungas 5,187 5,914 6,166 6,257 1% 35%
Caranavi 491 889 1,248 1,381 11% 8%
Inquisivi 741 801 805 807 0% 4%
Murillo 151 210 217 223 3% 1%
Rounded total 13,800 16,200 17,300 18,100 5% 100%
Figure 5. Distribution of coca cultivation in the Yungas of La Paz, 2005 (ha)

Inquisivi Murillo
Caranavi 4% 1%
8%
South
Yungas
North 52%
Yungas
35%
62
For the third year in a row, the municipality of La Asunta in South Yungas province, and the
municipality of Caranavi - the only municipality of the province of Caranavi - registered the largest
annual rate of increase in coca cultivation with respectively 15% and 11%. However, the
municipality of Coripata in North Yungas province remained the most important centre of coca
cultivation in the region of the Yungas of La Paz, with 4,708 ha in 2005 (or 26% of the regional
total). Compared with 2004, coca cultivation increased in all municipalities, except in Palos Blancos,
where a small decrease was observed.
Table 5. Distribution of coca cultivation by municipality in the Yungas of La Paz, 2002-2005

ha)
% change
Province Municipality 2002 2003 2004 2005 % of 2005 total
2004-2005
North Yungas Coripata 4,032 4,456 4,651 4,708 1% 26%
South Yungas Chulumani 2,678 3,020 3,157 3,252 3% 18%
South Yungas La Asunta 1,771 2,314 2,666 3,055 15% 17%
South Yungas Irupana 2,253 2,481 2,502 2,544 2% 14%
North Yungas Coroico 1,155 1,458 1,515 1,549 2% 9%
Caranavi Caranavi 491 889 1248 1381 11% 8%
Inquisivi Cajuata 741 801 805 807 0% 4%
South Yungas Yanacachi 421 483 488 494 1% 3%
Murillo La Paz 151 210 217 223 3% 1%
South Yungas Palos Blancos 59 58 53 50 -6% 0%
TOTAL 13,800 16,200 17,300 18,100 5% 100%
Figure 6. Distribution of coca cultivation by municipality in the Yungas of La Paz, 2002-2005 (ha)
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
hectare
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Coripata Chulumani La Asunta Irupana Coroico Caranavi Cajuata Yanacachi La Paz Palos
Blancos
2002 2003 2004 2005
Bolivian Law 1008 (“Law on the Regime Applicable to Coca and Controlled Substances”, 1988)
permits up to 12,000 ha of traditional coca cultivation for traditional consumption and other legal
uses. Most of this area is located in the Yungas of La Paz, although the law does not provide for a
geographic delimitation of the traditional coca cultivation area. Most of the coca cultivation in the
Yungas of La Paz is traded through the coca market, controlled by DIGECO, of Villa Fatima in La
Paz-city.
There was neither forced nor voluntary eradication in the Yungas of La Paz, in 2005. During field
missions, it was observed that there were new settlements in the Yungas of La Paz, mainly with
63
people coming from the Altiplano (La Paz, Potossi, Oruro, etc). These new settlements were
established in previously not populated areas of La Asunta and Caranavi, and their primary
agricultural activity was coca cultivation.
Although the project does not yet have updated data on coca leaf yield existed, for a couple of
years now, it was noted during its field missions that farmers were using more sophisticated
agricultural techniques in their coca fields, employing more fertilizers, pesticide and mechanical
irrigation of their coca fields. In Caranavi new coca fields established at the expenses of the
Primary Forest or coffee plantations, benefited from higher yields due to the richer soils.
Figure 7. 3-D view near the town of La Asunta, the Yungas of La Paz, 2005
Coca cultivation (red rectangle), in the municipality of La Asunta
Picture corresponding to the area within the red rectangle in the image above, showing coca fields in various
stages of development (2005).
64
Figure 8. Example of annual coca cultivation in the locality of Siguani, Municipality of La Asunta,
2002-2005
In 2002
coca
fields in
2002
In 2003
coca
fields
since
2002
new coca
fields in
2003
65
In 2004
coca
fields
since
2002
coca
fields
since
2003
new coca
fields in
2004
In 2005
coca
fields
since
2002
coca
fields
since
2003
new coca
fields in
2004
new coca
fields in
2005
66
Figure 9. Coca cultivation techniques in the Yungas of La Paz
1. Burning of land and soil

preparation: The burning of land
often takes place during the dry
season (May to August), but it
can also happen until the month
of December if the weather
conditions are suitable.
2. Terraces construction: Most

of the coca fields are
established on wuachus
(terraces) to avoid erosion and
soil nutrients loss. This practice
prolongs the life of the crop.
The width of the terraces varies
from forty-five centimetres to
one meter, depending on the
slope. The lines of furrows for
coca cultivation are established
transversally to the slope
direction. This practice is widely
used in traditional areas, while
in the rest of the Yungas,
terraces are not built.
The width and shape of the

wuachus varies according to
the slope and structure of the
terrain.
67
3. Seedling and transplant: The

coca seeds are obtained from
plants of 5 years old or older.
The seeds are settled in a
seedling nursery of rich soil and
abundant irrigation. They are
protected from the sun for about
4-6 weeks before their
transplantation to the field.
The seedling requires special

care before transplantation to
the coca field.
4. Young crop and first harvest:

The small plants are carefully
planted in the field, at a distance
of 20 cm between each other.
During the first few days, they
are continuously irrigated. A
new crop produces its first
harvest usually 12 months after
the transplantation, but there
have been reports of fields
harvested as soon as 8 months
after transplantation thanks to
the use of fertilizer.
68
In the Yungas of La Paz,

harvest of coca fields is mainly
done by women and children.
69
5. Maintenance: In the Yungas

of La Paz, a phytosanitary
treatment is applied to coca
bushes using fertilizers, and
pesticides. Irrigation is also
widely used. Typically, the
pesticides are applied to the
bushes right after the harvest, in
order to protect the crop from a
variety of plagues, including
larvae, fungus and ants. At 4-5
years old, the plant is totally
pruned, leaving only the base of
the trunk. This practice known
as pillu greatly increases the
yield of the crop starting from
the next harvest, which is
produced after 6-8 months. The
life of a coca field is about 30
years old.
The intensive use of chemical

pesticides, and foliar fertilizers
may produce coca leafs which
are not suitable for traditional
consumption like Akulliku
(mastication) and tea
preparation.
The bottom picture show

organic fertilizer being applied to
coca plants 3 months after
pruning.
70
Mechanical irrigation is widespread

in coca fields.
Example of pillu (pruning) after 3

weeks the first leaves start to re-
appear.
71
6. Drying and transport of the

leaves: Drying is done carefully to
protect the leaves and maintain
their quality. After the harvest, the
fresh coca leaves are stored for at
least one night in the dark and
after that spread for sun drying. In
the traditional area, the leaves are
spread over a special floor built of
dark stones called “cachi”. The
“cachi” accelerates considerably
the time of drying. In other areas,
the leaves are spread over
agricultural nets. If the coca leaves
are spread right after the harvest,
they become damaged and their
value reduces drastically. If rain
comes over the drying coca
leaves, or the farmer picks them up
before complete drying, the leaves
are also damaged.
Dried coca leaves packed and

loaded being transported to
the market
72
2.1.2 Coca cultivation in Apolo
Apolo is located at the northern part of the department of La Paz, on the eastern edge of the
Andean mountain range. With relatively dry weather conditions and poor soils, coca fields in Apolo
often have a low yield and are cultivated for only for about three to five years.
In 2004, DIRECO conducted a cadastral survey of coca cultivation in the Apolo region, measuring
in situ all the coca fields located in the region. It revealed that coca cultivation reached 289 ha in
2004. A large proportion of coca cultivation was found in the southern part of the Apolo municipality
and in a small part of the neighbouring municipality of Juan José Perez (also known as Charazani
municipality) in the province of Bautista Saavedra. These areas were not surveyed by the
monitoring project in 2003, and only 50 ha of coca cultivation was found. In 2004, the satellite
coverage was expanded to include these areas and the 2004 survey revealed 273 ha of coca
cultivation. In 2005, no imagery was acquired in the Apolo region. A field verification was
undertaken in August 2005 and noted that there was some increase in coca cultivation, mainly in
the southern part of the Province Franz Tamayo, while in other parts, the team observed
abandoned coca field. These changes were considered as off setting each other and the estimate
for the whole Apolo region remained at 300 ha.
Table 6. Coca cultivation in Apolo region, 2003 and 2005 (ha)
% change 2004 –
Province Municipality 2003 2004 2005
2005
Franz Tamayo Apolo 50 300 300 0%
Coca cultivation in Apolo region is traditionally associated with cassava to take advantage of the
same furrow for two different crops. The coca fields in Apolo are scattered and relatively small
(about 200 m2) compared to coca fields found elsewhere in the country. Terraces are not used.
The coca cultivation techniques and coca leaf sun drying are similar to techniques used in the
Yungas area of La Paz.
The northern part of Apolo is part of the Madidi National Park, the largest biosphere reserve in
Bolivia. Only a few dispersed and small coca fields were found on the western side of the Madidi
Park. In Apolo, coca cultivation is considered traditional according to law 1008. No eradication is
undertaken in this area.
A well maintained coca field on poor soil, August 2005.
73
Map 4: Coca cultivation density for Chapare, Bolivia 2005
Río Cabito
66°0'W 65°30'W 65°0'W 64°30'W
ré
M amo
Río BRAZIL
U
PE R
15°30'S
15°30'S
SanBoAndrés
l ivia
Cochabamba
re
e
Río Ibar
e
Ap
Loreto
o
PARAGUAY
Rí
ure
Sec CHILE
Río ARG EN TIN A
San Ignacio Beni
El Puente
Río Isiboro
16°0'S
16°0'S
ay
ó Guap
rande
Río G
Mineros
Río Ch
Río Yapaca
i
irir
apare
hip
ut a
Arr. Uri
C
Use
Río
ni
Río Río P
ir ay
Río
ut
Ich
a
o a
16°30'S
16°30'S
Chimore
Santa Cruz
Puerto Patiño
San Carlos
&
Río Altama
Rí Villa Tunari
o M
a
alp
sam
a so Yapacaní
era
Isinota
chi
&
Et
Río
Villa 14 de Septiembre
&
Eterazama re
& a Pto. G. Villarroel
ap &
Ch osas
a
Chipiriri ip
Río Arr. Mar
ot
&
Río Isin
Villa Tunari
& ShinahotaChimore
17°0'S
17°0'S
& &
Ivirgarzama Rí
Puerto Villarroel & o Ch
Río Chim
ore
Tablas Monte
&
Tiquipaya
Río
oré
Esp
Valle Hermoso
&
u
Río Iv
ma
ir izu la Puerto Grether
ba &
Colomi Za
Río Río Ichilo
Tiraque
Sacaba Colomi Entre Rios (Bulo Bulo)
& Río
Saj Río
Río t a M oile
Oso
Cochabamba s
Río
17°30'S
17°30'S
M
San Benito
olle
Tolata
Pojo
Río
Arbieto Río
Arani Vacas Aliz
San
a r
Ma
te o
Tarata Pocona
Buena Vista
Alalay Totora
Capinota Comarapa Mairana
Anzaldo
Cultivation density
Río
Arampampa Río
San
(ha/km² ) M
izq
Vila Vila
Rí
Juá
18°0'S
18°0'S
ue
o Pa
Río Saipina Pampa Grande

jt
0.1 - 1.0 Ca
a
Acasio in e Mizque Omereque

1.1 - 2.0
2.1 - 4.0
Río
Río Temblad
C ien
4.1 - 8.0 Toro Toro

aga
> 8.0 Trigal

Potosi Aiquile
eras
Moro Moro
Department
San Pedro boundaries
de Buena Vista Río S
a n Pe
dro Pasorapa
Municipality boundaries
Main Road Poroma
Chuquisaca
18°30'S
18°30'S
0 25 50 Vallegrande
River km
Pocoata
& Village center Ravelo
Chuquisaca
66°0'W 65°30'W 1 : 1.400.000 65°0'W 64°30'W

74
2.1.3 Coca cultivation in Chapare
The Chapare region is situated in Cochabamba department, and the region is also referred to as
the Cochabamba tropics, extending over the provinces of Chapare, Carrasco and Tiraque. In
contrast to the Yungas of La Paz, Chapare region has moderate slopes and large rivers.
Elevations vary from 300 to 2500 meters, with coca cultivated between 300 and 1000 meters. The
highest mountains are located in the south and the country’s large tropical savannas begin in the
northern part of Chapare. Temperatures are tropical and the area records the highest precipitation
levels in Bolivia.
In the nineties, the Chapare region held the largest amount of coca cultivation, but following
sustained eradication efforts and alternative development programmes, cultivation decreased
dramatically.
The 2005 survey found 7,000 ha of coca cultivation in Chapare, representing a decrease of 31%
compared to the 10,100 ha found in 2004. The significant decrease is mainly due to an agreement
signed between the coca farmers and the government in October 2004 establishing the temporary
authorization for 3,200 ha of coca cultivation. Since the signature of this agreement, eradication
took place in a more peaceful and efficient way. Mostly, coca farmers respected the agreement
and eradicated fields were not replanted. This was noticeable on the satellite image as showed on
figure 12. Between 2004 and 2005, coca cultivation decreased in all three provinces of Chapare,
Carrasco and Tiraque of the Chapare region.
Table 7. Distribution by province of coca cultivation in Chapare region, 2003-2005 (ha)

% change % of 2005
Province 2003 2004 2005
2004-2005 total
Chapare 4,250 5,844 4,094 -30% 58%
Carrasco 2,864 3,520 2,312 -34% 33%
Tiraque 214 723 605 -16% 9%
Rounded Total 7,300 10,100 7,000 -31% 100%
In the Chapare region, during 2005 and up to time of writing this report (June 2006), there were
less demonstrations and road blockades than in 2004. The agreement authorizing 3,200 ha of
coca in Chapare will be revised once the study quantifying the national demand for coca leaf will
be concluded. These 3,200 ha of authorized coca cultivation are additional to the amount of 12,000
ha of coca cultivation authorized by Law 1008 which includes about 200 ha of coca cultivation in
the Yungas de Vandiola.
Table 8. Distribution by municipality of coca cultivation in Chapare region, 2003-2005 (ha)

% change % of 2005
Province Municipality 2003 2004 2005
2004-2005 total
Chapare Villa Tunari 4,250 5,841 4,094 -30% 58%
Entre Díos
Carrasco (former Pojo) 1,106 1,921 817 -57% 12%
Carrasco Puerto Villarroel 1,394 821 818 0% 12%
Tiraque Tiraque 214 724 605 -16% 9%
Carrasco Chimore 250 525 432 -18% 6%
Carrasco Totora 114 253 245 -3% 4%
Rounded Total 7,300 10,100 7,000 -31% 100%
The municipality of Villa Tunari continued to be the most important area of coca cultivation in the
region, and represented 58% of the coca cultivation in Chapare in 2005, even though coca
cultivation decreased by 30% in this municipality between 2004 and 2005. The municipality
includes part of the Isiboro Secure National Park, which remained the national park with the
highest level of coca cultivation in the country.
75
In the central area of the region of Cochabamba Tropics, around the municipality of Puerto Villaroel
and Chimore, coca cultivation remained relatively low, and even decreased slightly between 2004
and 2005. This situation is mainly due to a combination of alternative development projects and
eradication campaigns.
It should be noted that political boundaries are not properly defined between the departments of
Cochabamba and Beni. For this reason, although some coca cultivation might actually be located
in Beni Department, all the coca fields identified during the survey along the departmental border
were counted as part of the municipality of Villa Tunari, in the Department of Cochabamba.
Figure 10. Distribution by municipality of coca cultivation in Chapare region, 2003 – 2005(ha)
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
hectare
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
Villa Tunari Entre Díos Puerto Tiraque Chimore Totora
(former Pojo) Villarroel
2003 2004 2005
Figure 11. Distribution by municipality of coca cultivation in Chapare region, 2005 (ha)
Chimore Totora
6% 3%
Tiraque
9%
Puerto
Villarroel
Villa Tunari
12%
58%
Entre Díos
(former
Pojo)
12%
76
Figure 12. Coca cultivation encroaching primary forest
Satellite image taken in 2004 (Spot false color): coca fields bordered in white.
The same area as above, from a satellite image taken in 2005 (SPOT 5 , false
color): eradicated coca cultivation delineated with white lines and existent
coca cultivation in 2005 is delineated with yellow lines
77
Contrary to the situation of the Yungas of La Paz where there was no eradication, eradication of
coca cultivation was intense in the Chapare region in 2005. For this reason, farmers often
interspersed or associated coca bushes with other crops, or hid their coca fields under tree canopy
to avoid detection and eradication. However, with the agreement between the coca farmers and
the government to authorize 3,200 ha of coca cultivation, it was observed during field missions that
farmers tended not to hide their coca fields any longer, or intersperse them with other crops, and
most coca fields were found now free of association with other crops. This was evidenced in the
satellite images as seen on figure 12.
It is generally accepted that coca cultivation is done with much more care in Yungas than in
Chapare, and the techniques of cultivation differ from the ones used in Yungas. For example, the
seedbeds in Chapare are usually not covered.
The picture shows encircled in red a seedling prepared for further transplantation to a coca field
Since the terrain is flat, there is no need to build terraces. The coca bushes in Chapare are bigger
than in Yungas. The pruning practice does not exist. This could be due to the intensive eradication,
resulting in most of the coca fields being younger than four years old, and thus don’t need pruning.
Coca field free of association or coverage
78
Association with other crops or coca cultivated under canopy were less common in 2005 than in
the paste. However, they were still present in some areas of Chapare.
Coca under canopy
Coca associated with yucca
The coca leaves are also sun dried on bare floor before commercialization, but not with the same
care as in the Yungas. According to FELCN, part of the production is marketed outside the region;
79
other part is used for local consumption (chewing and medicines). However, FELCN believed that
an important portion of the coca leaves are used locally for cocaine manufacturing.
The life of a coca field in Chapare, under normal conditions is on average 30 years. Isolated,
scattered old plants of big dimensions have been observed, still yielding substantial quantity of
coca leaves. Fertilizers and pesticides are also widely used in the Chapare.
The picture shows an aerial view of a coca field, burned land to implement a new crop and sun-drying of
coca leaves
Sun-drying of coca leaves, Chapare, 2005
80
2.3 COCA YIELD AND PRODUCTION
In December 2005, UNODC started a new coca yield study in the Yungas of La Paz. The field work
was implemented through an agreement with Carmen Pampa University. The survey relied on a
sample of 74 fields randomly selected among six strata. The strata were defined based mainly on
altitude and slope ranges. The sample was designed by the statistician of the UNODC Illicit Crop
Monitoring Programme. The methodology relied on weighing fresh and sun-dried coca leaves from
a sample of harvest. The study aims to establish an average annual yield. It is therefore necessary
to weigh all the harvests that can take place during the year. For this reason, the survey results will
only be available in 2006, and will be used to estimate coca leaf production for next year survey.
In the absence of detailed study on coca leaf conducted jointly the Government and UNODC, coca
leaf production in Bolivia was estimated from yield estimates previously used by UNODC, notably
in the World Drug Report. Sun-dried coca leaf production in Bolivia was thus estimated at 42,000
metric tons. From that total, 30,900 metric tons could be available for illicit activities, potentially
producing about 90 metric tons of cocaine in 2005. This corresponded to a decrease of 16%
compared to last year potential cocaine production of 107 metric tons.
It should be noted that this estimate represented the potential coca leaf production. Due to lack of
data on the issue, it does not take into account the likely proportion of coca leaf from Chapare
region destined for local consumption of coca leaf (chewing and medicinal preparation). A better
estimate should be available when the study on the local demand of coca leaf has been concluded.
The decrease in cocaine production can be attributed to the decrease in coca cultivation in the
Chapare region (-31%).
Figure 13. Cocaine production in Bolivia 1994 - 2005 (in metric ton)
300
250
200
metric tons
150
100
50
0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Metric tons 240 215 200 150 70 43 60 60 79 107 90
81
In 2005, potential cocaine production in Bolivia accounted for 10% of the global potential cocaine
production of 910 metric tons. This was a slightly lower percentage than in 2004 when potential
cocaine production in Bolivia represented about 11% of the global potential cocaine production.
Table 9. Potential cocaine production in the Andean region 1995 - 2005 (in mt)
%
% of
change
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2005
2004-
total
2005
Bolivia 240 215 200 150 70 43 60 60 79 107 90 -16% 10%
Peru 460 435 325 240 175 141 150 165 155 190 180 -5% 20%
Colombia 230 300 350 435 680 695 617 580 550 640 640 0% 70%
Total 930 950 875 825 925 879 827 805 784 937 910 -3% 100%
Figure 14. Potential cocaine production in the Andean region 1995 - 2005 (in mt)
Colombian production data for 2004

1,000 and 2005 is based on new field research.
175 190
141 180
800
150
435 165
460 325 240 155
metric ton
600
680 640
400 640
350 695
230 300 435 617 550
580
200
240 215 200

150
79 107 90
70 43 60 60
0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
82
2.4 COCA PRICES AND TRADING
In Bolivia, sun-dried coca leaf trade is regulated by DIGECO that controls the quantity and prices of
coca leaf traded in two markets: The market of Villa Fatima in La Paz-city and the market of
Sacaba in Cochabamba department, close to Cochabamba city.
Of the 12,872 metric tons of coca leaves that fell under the control of DIGECO in 2005, the largest
amount, 12,718 metric tons or 99%, was traded in Villa Fatima, and the remaining 154 metric tons
in Sacaba. Prices of coca leaves in Villa Fatima market were also slightly higher than in Sacaba
market, with respective annual averages of 32 Boliviano/kg (US$ 4.0/kg) and 31 Boliviano/kg (US$
3.90/kg). The annual average weighted price for coca leaves on these two markets was 32
Boliviano/kg (US$ 4.0/kg) in 2005.
Table 10. Reported monthly price of coca leaf marketed through DIGECO in 2005
Chapare: Sacaba market La Paz: Villa Fatima market Weighted average
Quantity sold Quantity sold

Month Bs./kg Bs./kg Bs./kg US$/kg
metric tons Metric tons
January 29 20 27 1,066 27 3,4
February 28 7 25 1,114 25 3,1
March 29 11 25 1,141 25 3,0
April 26 8 25 1,132 25 3,1
May 26 10 26 1,075 26 3,2
June 30 6 29 1,106 29 3,6
July 34 19 37 995 37 4,5
August 35 11 38 999 38 4,7
September 36 9 38 998 38 4,8
October 36 26 46 902 46 5,7
November 37 16 42 1,067 42 5,2
December 31 9 33 1,123 33 4,1
31 154 32 12,718 32 4,0
Source: DIGECO
Figure 15. Monthly coca leaf price in DIGECO markets and coca production
50 1,400
1,200
45
1,000
40
Metric tons
800
BOL/kg
35
600
30
400
25
200
20 -
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05
Qty Sold BOL/kg
83
Each trader is authorized by DIGECO to trade up to 500 pounds (227 kg) of dry coca leaf per
month. DIGECO’s authorization specifies where the coca leave are bought (Villa Fatima or Sacaba)
and the point of final destination for its retailing. Coca is retailed in packages of maximum 15
pounds (6.8 kg).
The following map shows the distribution of traded coca leaves throughout the country according to
the DIGECO registry. As in 2004, in 2005, most of the coca leaves ended up in Santa Cruz
department, followed by the departments of Tarija, La Paz and Potosi. In Santa Cruz, coca leaves
are supplied mostly for the workers of large scale industrial farms of soy beans and sugar canes
who use to chew it. Coca chewing is also widespread among miners of the departments of La Paz,
Potosi and Oruro. Although not documented, it is likely that an increasing quantity of coca leaves
traded in the southern of the country is smuggled to neighbouring Argentina.
The total value of the coca leaves traded through the control of DIGECO amounted to 418 millions
Bolivianos or US$ 51.6 millions in 2005
Between 2004 and 2005, the volume of trade increased by 8% (from 11,907 mt to 12,872 mt),
while the average annual prices decreased by 8% (from Bs. 35/kg to Bs. 32/kg). This market
responded to the law of supply and demand: when quantity available for trade increase, prices
tend to decrease. Farm-gate prices of dry coca leaf have been collected in Chapare on a monthly
basis by DIRECO since 1990 and by the UNODC monitoring project in the Yungas of La Paz since
2004. Average annual prices for coca leaf were higher in the Yungas of La Paz with 37
Boliviano/kg (US$4.7/kg) than in the Chapare with 33 Boliviano/kg (US$ 4.1/kg).
84
Farm-gate prices of dry coca leaf have been collected in Chapare on a monthly basis by DIRECO
since 1990 and by the UNODC monitoring project in the Yungas of La Paz since 2004. Average
annual prices for coca leaf were higher in the Yungas of La Paz with 37 Boliviano/kg (US$4.7/kg)
than in the Chapare with 33 Boliviano/kg (US$ 4.1/kg).
At the end of 2004, coca growers of Caranavi obtained their licenses to commercialize their
production in the coca market of Villa Fátima, which caused a higher supply of coca was caused
and consequently lower prices. The trend was maintained for the first months of 2005. Prices went
up again on mid year where the dry season starts and harvests are poor reaching a peak on
October and starting again the decreasing trend on December.
Table 11. Monthly coca leaf price in the Yungas of La Paz, 2005
Municipality
Municipality Municipality Municipality
Month of Average
of Coripata of La Asunta of Caranavi
Chulumani
Bs./Kg Bs./Kg Bs./Kg Bs./Kg Bs./Kg $US/Kg
January 39 35 40 41 39 4,8
February 37 38 39 40 38 4,7
March 37 37 37 40 38 4,7
April 35 37 36 38 37 4,5
May 35 37 36 38 37 4,5
Jun 36 37 37 37 37 4,5
July 36 38 36 37 37 4,6
August 36 37 36 37 37 4,5
September 35 36 37 37 36 4,5
Ocober 35 36 37 38 37 4,5
November 36 35 38 37 37 4,5
December 35 35 37 37 36 4,5
Annual average 36 37 37 38 37 4,6
Source: UNODC monitoring project
Compared to 2004, coca leaf prices remained stable in Bolivian currency at Bs. 37/kg in Yungas.
Table 12. Reported monthly coca leaf price in the Chapare, 2005
Chapare
Bs./kg US$/kg
January 40 4,9
February 41 5,1
March 42 5,2
April 35 4,4
May 28 3,5
June 28 3,5
July 30 3,6
August 30 3,7
September 33 4,0
October 30 3,7
November 31 3,8
December 30 3,7
33 4,1
Source: DIRECO
Compared to 2004, coca leaf prices in Chapare region, decreased from Bs. 41/kg to Bs. 33/kg (-
19%). The decrease in prices, parallel to a decrease in production of coca leaf in the Chapare,
could be due to the increased interdiction efforts in the region that disturbed the coca market and
made it less attractive in general for coca buyers.
87
Figure 16. Monthly coca leaf price in the Yungas of La Paz and Chapare Bolivia 2005
6
4
$US/Kg
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Yungas Chapare Digeco
Sources: UNODC monitoring project/ /DIRECO/ DIGECO
Weighted by production, the annual average price for coca leaf outside the market controlled by
DIGECO was US$ 4.5/kg. This was a higher price than the price US$ 4.0/kg on the market
controlled by DIGECO. However, during the dry season when less coca leaves were available,
prices from the markets controlled by DIGECO were similar and even larger than prices on other
markets.
Prices of coca leaves have not been systematically recorded for Apolo. Anecdotal information
reported much lower prices in Apolo than elsewhere in the country, ranging from US$2.5 to
US$2.8/kg in 2005. The reason for lower prices in Apolo could be attributed to the remoteness of
the region, outside the main trading centres. The low coca leaf production in Apolo (281 mt) was
rather negligible compared to the national total, and therefore was not taken into account in the
establishment of the national annual price estimate.
The long term trend of prices can be appreciated with prices of coca leaves from Chapare
collected by DIRECO since 1990. Following a strong price rise in 1999 – in line with a strong
increase in eradication – dry coca leaf prices reached a peak of US$5.7 /kg in 2000. Since then,
prices fell to the lowest since 1998 4.1/kg. However, coca leaf prices in Bolivia continued to be
substantially higher than in neighbouring Peru (US$ 2.9/kg).
88
Table 13. Reported monthly prices of coca leaf in Chapare (US$/kg)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
January 0.8 1.0 0.9 1.4 0.9 1.1 1.3 2.0 5.9 5.4 5.7 6.1 5.4 5.3 4.9
February 1.2 0.8 1.4 0.9 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.5 2.4 6.0 5.5 5.6 5.8 5.3 5.1 5.1
March 0.8 0.9 1.8 0.7 1.3 0.8 1.4 1.5 2.4 6.0 5.6 5.6 5.7 5.2 5.2 5.2
April 1.0 1.2 1.5 0.8 1.4 1.1 1.9 1.4 3.7 6.0 5.6 5.7 5.7 5.2 5.3 4.4
May 1.2 0.9 1.5 1.2 1.4 1.7 2.2 1.5 4.8 5.3 5.3 5.7 5.6 5.3 5.2 3.5
June 0.9 0.9 1.4 1.6 1.4 1.4 2.2 1.4 4.9 4.8 5.6 5.4 5.6 5.4 5.1 3.5
July 1.1 0.9 1.2 1.8 1.4 1.3 2.3 1.4 4.9 5.3 5.6 5.4 5.7 5.5 5.1 3.6
August 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.7 1.4 1.2 2.1 1.4 5.0 5.3 5.7 5.4 5.7 5.5 5.1 3.7
September 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.5 0.9 1.3 2.1 1.5 6.0 5.4 6.1 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.3 4.0
October 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.7 1.4 1.2 2.0 1.5 5.1 5.3 6.1 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.0 3.7
November 0.8 1.1 0.6 1.5 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.7 5.4 5.3 5.8 5.3 5.4 5.4 5.0 3.8
December 0.9 1.0 0.9 1.3 0.9 1.0 1.4 2.0 5.7 5.5 5.7 5.2 5.5 5.5 5.1 3.7
Annual
Average 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.8 1.5 4.4 5.5 5.7 5.5 5.6 5.4 5.2 4.1
US$/kg
Source: DIRECO
The estimation of the total farm-gate value of coca leaf production in Bolivia included the total
value of the market controlled by DIGECO, and the farm-gate value of coca leaves outside this
market. In 2005, it amounted to US$180 million.
Table 14. Estimation of the total farm-gate value of coca leaf production in Bolivia, 2005
Price
Region Production (mt) Value (US$)
(US$/kg)
Chapare 19,348 4.1 79,326,800
Yungas, outside the 12,000 ha permitted by law 1008 11,507 4.6 52,932,200
Yungas from 12,000 ha permitted by law 1008 10,951 4.0 43,804,000
Apolo 281 2.7 744,650
Rounded total 42,000 180,000,000
The total farm-gate value of coca leaf production in 2005 was thus equivalent to 2.1% of the
projected Bolivian GDP3 of US$ 8.4 billions for 2005, or 12% compared with the projected value of
the licit agricultural sector of US$ 1.5 billions in 2005. These figures suggest that, for the country as
a whole, coca production still has and impact on the Bolivian economy, and continues to play an
important role within the coca producing regions.
The FELCN also reported street prices of cocaine paste and cocaine of unknown purity from the
major cities and coca growing regions in Bolivia. Reported prices of coca paste and cocaine did not
vary from prices reported in 2004.
3
sources: IICA,2005
89
Table 15. Reported prices of cocaine base and cocaine HCL, Bolivia, 2005 (US$/kg)
City Cocaine base Cocaine HCL
La Paz 1,150 2,000
Cochabamba 1,150 1,800
Santa Cruz 1,200 1,700
Average
Region
Yungas of La Paz 800 n.a.
Chapare 1,000 n.a.
Source: FELCN
It is interesting to note that prices for coca leaf and its derivatives were consistently higher in
Bolivia than in neighbouring Peru.
Table 16. Prices for coca leaf and its derivatives in Peru and Bolivia, 2005 (US$/kg)
Products Peru Bolivia
Coca leaf 2.9 4.1

Cocaine base 640 1,200
Cocaine HCL 900 1,800
90
2.5 COCA CULTIVATION AND RELATED ISSUES
2.1.4 COCA CULTIVATION AND LAND USE
The Bolivian National Authorities of Land Management (‘Ordenamiento Territorial’) released in

2002 a country wide map of major land use, based on the classification of Landsat images. This
map was superimposed on the map of coca cultivation for 2003, 2004 and 2005. This analysis
revealed that coca cultivation is found over four main types of land use: Extensive livestock and
agriculture with permanent crop; timber forest; timber forest and cattle; non-timber forest and cattle;
hunting, fishing and non-timber forest products.
In 2005, 78% of coca cultivation took place on land dedicated to extensive livestock and agriculture
with permanent crop, and 18% over land where the major land use is classified as timber forest.
This last category corresponded mainly to the border of the Isiboro Secure National Park that is
now protected, meaning that activities like extensive agricultural or logging are no longer permitted.
Table 17. Distribution of 2003 - 2005 coca cultivation by major land use and by region (ha)
%
% of
change
Region Major land use 2003 2004 2005 2005
2004 –
total
2005
Yungas Extensive livestock and
14,908 15,878 16,381 3% 91%
agriculture with permanent crop
timber forest 1,069 1,270 1,498 18% 8%
timber forest and cattle 186 189 204 8% 1%
Chapare Extensive livestock and
3,265 3,659 3,366 -8% 48%
agriculture with permanent crop
timber forest 3,442 5,433 3,069 -44% 44%
non-timber forest and cattle 369 495 298 -40% 4%
Hunting, fishing and non-timber
194 507 277 -45% 4%
forest products
Apolo Extensive livestock, sheep 50 178 178 0% 59%
Timber forest 11 11 0% 4%
Very scattered forest with cattle 51 51 0% 17%
non-timber forest and cattle 61 61 0% 20%
total 23,600 27,700 25,400
The analysis of the location of the coca cultivation that appears between 2004 and 2005 in the
Yungas, showed that most of the new coca cultivation (500 ha over a total of 800 ha) took place
over the land dedicated to extensive livestock and permanent crop. The remaining increase of 300
ha took place at the expense of forested areas, where coca cultivation increased by 26% between
2004 and 2005. In the Chapare area, coca cultivation is spread over extensive livestock,
permanent crop (48%) and forest areas (44%). The decrease in coca cultivation between 2004 and
2005 took place mainly over forested areas (-44%).
Figure 17. Coca cultivation and land uses over Chapare and the Yungas
Yungas Chapare
hunting, fishing and
non-timber forest
timber forest
products
timber forest and non-timber forest

cattle and cattle
Extensive livestock
and agriculture with
permanent crop
timber forest
Extensive livestock
and agriculture with
permanent crop
92
2.1.5 COCA CULTIVATION AND ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
The Bolivian government usually refers to six geographical zones for the implementation of
Alternative Development projects: four in the Yungas of La Paz (Caranavi North and Alto Beni,
Caranavi Centre South, region of La Asunta, Inquisivi, south-western region), and two in Chapare
(Bosque de uso multiple, or BUM, and the colonization area of the Isiboro Secure National Park).
The number of projects and their level of interventions within each of these zones was not
quantified in 2005, but varied broadly from no intervention at all to high level of intervention.
Table 18. Coca cultivation and alternative development in Bolivia

% of 2005
level of Coca Coca Coca % of
coca
Region Zone interven cultivation cultivation cultivation change
cultivation
tions in 2003 in 2004 in 2005 2004 - 2005
total
Yungas Caranavi North Alto Beni High 96 99 96 -3% 0.4%

of La 478 650 708 9% 3%
Paz Caranavi Centro South Medium
South-western Yungas and
14,825 15,802 16,470 4% 65%
La Asunta Low
Inquisivi None 801 807 809 0% 3%
Bosque Uso Multiple (BUM)
4,370 4,317 4107 -5% 16%
or Multiple Use Forest High
Chapare Colonization area of the
1,640 2,587 1241 -52% 5%
Isiboro Secure National Park Low
Other None 1,273 3,185 1663 -48% 7%
Apolo Apolo None 50 300 300 0% 1%
Rounded total 23,500 27,700 25,400 -8% 100%
In the Yungas of La Paz, the area of major intervention of alternative development was the
Northern part of the municipality of Caranavi and the Alto Beni, representing 0.4% of the national
total of coca cultivation in 2005. However, the region of South-western Yungas and La Asunta
representing the largest proportion of coca cultivation in 2005 (65%), received fewer support from
alternative development project.
In Chapare, the main area of intervention of alternative development was the region defined by the
Ministry as ‘multiple use forest’. Between 2004 and 2005, coca cultivation decreased 5% in this
area, whereas coca cultivation decreased by 31% in the Chapare region as a whole.
The area of the Isiboro Secure National Park was the area where most of the eradication took
place in 2005. Unlike in previous year, eradication was not followed by replanting of coca fields,
principally due to the agreement between the Government and the coca farmers to limit coca
cultivation to 3,200 ha in the Chapare region. This resulted in a net coca cultivation decrease in the
area of 52% between 2004 and 2005.
UNODC agro-forestry project support to coffee development (picture: project BOL/I79)
94
Map 9: Coca cultivation and National Parks, Bolivia 2005
65°W 60°W
Bolivia
Mad er a
10°S
10°S
SOUTH AMERICA
!
BRAZIL
Cobija Pando
eD
ios
e d
M ad r
Manuripi Heat
Ri o
Iten
ez
i
en
oB
Ri
Ri o
Beni
PERU
Noel Kempff
Ma
mor
Madidi Est. Biológica Mercado

e
Apolo del Beni
!
15°S
15°S
Pilon Lajas Trinidad
Apolobamba
La Paz
Tit
ic aca
Yungas
lak
e
Isiboro Secure
Cotapata
^La Paz Chapare
Tunari
Cochabamba
!
Santa Cruz
Carrasco
Cochabamba San Matias
Amboro !
Sajama ! Santa Cruz
Oruro
Toro Toro
Oruro El Palmar
lake
Poopo
Kaa Iya del
! Gran Chaco
Sucre Otuquis
!
Potosi
20°S
20°S
Chuquisaca
Potosi
Cordillera de
Sama
Ri
!
o
Tarija
Pi
Tarija
lco
Tariquia
ma
yo
PA R A G U AY
CHILE Eduardo
Avaroa
Cultivation density
(ha/km² )
0.1 - 1
1.1 - 4.0
>4
ARGENTINA National parks

25°S
25°S
National parks affected

by coca cultivation
0 150 300 km Department boundaries
1:8,000,000 Yun... : Coca growing areas
65°W 60°W

95
2.1.6 COCA CULTIVATION IN NATIONAL PARKS
There are 21 protected areas and national parks in Bolivia, totalling an area of 165,000 sq km,
representing 15% of the national territory. In 2005 coca cultivation was found in three national
parks: In the national park of Madidi, in the Apolo region, only about 10 ha of coca cultivation were
found. A much larger amount of 1,950 ha of coca cultivation was found in the two national parks
Isiboro Secure and Carrasco, in Chapare region. Coca cultivation within these two National Parks
represented 28% of the coca cultivation of Chapare region.
Between 2004 and 2005, coca cultivation decreased by 52% in the areas of the National Parks,
from 4,100 ha to 1,952 ha. The decrease is mainly due to strong eradication efforts inside the
parks. The agreement between the coca farmers and the government to limit to 3,200 ha the level
of authorized coca cultivation in 2005, resulted in the farmers complying with the limit, without
replanting the coca fields that had been destroyed by eradication.
Ecosystems of the National Parks are particularly fragile and the deforestation for the
establishment of coca cultivation makes irreversible damages to their environment. Although
eradication has been efficient, it should be noted that the damage to the forest due to coca
cultivation is irreversible.
Table 19. Coca cultivation estimates by national parks in Chapare 2003 – 2005 (ha)
% change % of 2005
Area 2003 2004 2005
2004 - 2005 total
Isiboro Secure National Park 1,605 2,807 1,161 -59% 17%
Carrasco National Park 778 1,257 781 -38% 11%
Madidi National Park n.a. 10 10 0% 0.1%
Total within National Parks 2,400 4,100 1,952 -52% 28%
Outside National Parks 4,900 6,000 5,053 -16% 72%
Rounded Total 7,300 10,100 7,005 -31% 100%
Figure 18. Distribution of coca cultivation in Chapare region inside and outside national parks,
2004 – 2005 (ha)
7000
6000
5000
4000
hectare
3000
2000
1000
0
Total within National Parks Outside National Parks
2003 2004 2005
96
2.6 REPORTED ERADICATION
In 2005, the Bolivian Government reported the eradication of 6,073 ha of coca fields. No
eradication was reported in Yungas of La Paz. The level of reported eradication decreased by 28%
compared to the level of eradication in 2004. In Bolivia, the eradication of coca cultivation is
exclusively manual, and no chemical or spraying agents are used.
Figure 19. Reported eradication and coca cultivation in Bolivia, 1995 – 2005 (ha)
60,000
50,000
40,000
he
cta
re 30,000
20,000
10,000
-
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05
Coca cultivation 48,600 48,100 45,800 38,000 21,800 19,600 19,900 24,400 22,800 27,600 25,400
Eradication 5,498 7,512 7,026 11,621 16,999 7,953 9,435 11,853 10,087 8,437 6,073
Eradication in the Chapare was often opposed by the farmers. However, since the agreement
signed in October 2004 and temporarily authorizing coca farmers to grow up to 3,200 ha of coca in
the Chapare, eradication campaigns have been better accepted by the farmers, and there was no
violence reported. Since February 2006 the Government has been implementing a policy of
voluntary eradication.
Figure 20. Reported monthly eradication in Chapare in 2005 (ha)

700
600
500
400
hectare
300
200
100
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Eradication 361.41 508.57 548.34 606.24 402.3 546.2 660.39 622.71 500.94 592.43 414.3 309.53
97
The Bolivian government also reported the eradication of 52 ha of coca seedlings in the Chapare
region, an increase of 6% compared to 2004. The increase in the eradication of coca seedlings
avoided the replanting of eradicated coca fields.
Table 20. Reported monthly eradication of coca seedlings, 2003 -2005 (m2)
2003 2004 2005
January 1,460 1,795 2,748
February 1,415 2,830 4,516
March 4,520 3,296 4,320
April 4,013 2,936 4,825
May 2,352 2,989 3,639
June 2,972 5,411 4,737
July 5,962 6,963 4,372
August 10,140 4,344 5,294
September 6,438 3,156 4,010
October 9,978 4,470 4,812
November 7,280 5,869 4,222
December 3,294 5,488 4,862
Total 59,823 49,547 52,357
Source: DIRECO
Manual eradication of a coca field in Chapare
98
2.7 REPORTED SEIZURE
DIGECO controls the trade of coca leaves within the country, which also includes control over the
transport of coca leaves. Coca leaves are seized if transported without license or outside the
authorized route specified in the license. In 2005, DIGECO reported the seizure of 886 metric tons
of coca leaves, representing a spectacular increase of 470% compared to the 2004 reported
seizure of 155 metric tons. The increase in seizure of coca leaf can be attributed to the
strengthening of DIGECO’s special force for the control of coca leaves (Grupo Especial de Control
de la hoja de Coca, GECC), which included the control of additional roads, and improvement in
equipment and infrastructure.
In addition, it should be noted that 2.1 metric tons of coca leaves from Peru were seized mostly in
La Paz department, representing 0.2% of the total seizure in Bolivia This seizures occurred mainly
during the Bolivian dry season, when there are less coca leaf available in Bolivia. During 2004, 26
metric tons of Peruvian coca leaves had been seized by the GECC.
Table 21. Reported seizure of coca leaves, 2002 – 2005 (kg)

Department 2002 2003 2004 2005
Cochabamba 214 11,105 37,748 591,803
La Paz 31,291 22,375 66,396 172,331
Santa Cruz 7,343 20,828 30,441 68,508
Oruro 1,205 4,682 6,120 24,814
Tarija 1,407 4,451 10,183 16,499
Beni 728 600 904 7,525
Sucre 0 1,450 1,448 3,229
Potosi 357 1,321 1,942 1,509
Pando 0 0 - 50
Total: 42,544 66,811 155,182 886,268
Figure 21. Reported seizure of coca leaves, 2002-2005 (kg)

600,000
500,000
400,000
kg
300,000
200,000
100,000
0
Cochabamba La Paz Santa Cruz Others
2002 2003 2004 2005
The Special Force for the Fight against Drugs (FELCN) reports annually on drugs seizures.
Between 2004 and 2005, there was a spectacular increase in reported seizure of cocaine
hydrochloride, from 531 mt to 1,300 mt.
99
Table 22. Reported seizure of drugs, Bolivia, 1997 – 2005 (kg)

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Cocaine base 10,848 8,906 6,905 5,044 4,280 4,741 6,934 8,189 10,152
Cocaine HCL 1,477 2,440 802 555 334 362 5,969 531 1,309
Heroin 2.9 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cannabis 3,617 320 2,160 3,745 7,055 8,754 8,510 28,200 34,557
Source: FELCN
Figure 22. Reported seizure of cocaine base and cocaine HCL, Bolivia, 1997 – 2005 (kg)
12000
10000
8000
kg
6000
4000
2000
0
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Cocaine base Cocaine HCL
The peak in seizure of cocaine HCL in 2003 was due to an exceptional operation conducted by
FELCN. The graph also showed that seizure of coca paste increased steadily since 2001. The
same trend can be seen in the report of destruction of maceration pit and clandestine coca paste
or cocaine laboratories.
Table 23. Reported destruction of clandestine laboratories and macerations pits

Type 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Coca paste and/or cocaine
1,066 1,245 925 628 1,006 1,420 1,769 2,254 2,619
laboratories
Precusors laboratories 19 15 8 3 2 6 0 3 2
Cocaine laboratories only 10 4 3 17 3 1 0 4 3
Maceration pit 1,481 1,659 1,179 790 1,292 1,950 2,544 3,293 4,064
100
Figure 23. Reported destruction of clandestine laboratories and macerations pits

4500
4000
3500
number of destruction
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Coca paste and/or cocaine 1066 1245 925 628 1006 1420 1769 2254 2619
laboratories
Maceration pit 1481 1659 1179 790 1292 1950 2544 3293 4064
101
102
PART 4. COLOMBIA COCA CULTIVATION SURVEY
Colombia Coca Survey for 2005
SUMMARY FACTS SHEET
Variation
2004 2005
on 2004
Net coca cultivation (rounded total) 80,000 hectares + 8% 86,000 hectares
Of which Meta-Guaviare region 28,500 hectares - 9% 25,970 hectares
Pacific region 15,800 hectares + 12% 17,650 hectares
Central region 15,100 hectares + 4% 15,630 hectares
Putumayo-Caqueta region 10,900 hectares +28% 13,950 hectares
Elsewhere 10,100 hectares +24% 12,570 hectares
Reported accumulated aerial spraying of
136,550 hectares +2% 138,775 hectares
coca bush
Reported manual eradication of coca bush 2,589 hectares 31,285 hectares
US$ 810 /kg + 12 % US$ 910 /kg
Average farm-gate price of coca paste
COP 2,119,000 /kg - 0.5% COP 2,109,000 /kg
Total farm-gate value of the production of coca leaf
US$ 843 million
and derivatives
in percent of GDP (US$ 122 billion in 2005) 0.7%
in percent of GDP of agricultural sector
6%
(US$ 13.8 billion in 2005)
Number of households involved in coca 68,600
cultivation households
Annual household gross income from the
US$ 12,300
production of coca leaf and its derivatives
Annual use of fertilizers on coca fields ~85,000 mt
Annual use of herbicides on coca fields ~12 million litres
Potential production of cocaine 6401 mt 640mt
In percent of world cocaine production 68 % 70 %
US$ 1,713 /kg + 9% US$ 1,860/kg
Average cocaine price
COP 4,600,000 /kg - 6% COP 4,315,000/kg
Reported seizure of cocaine 149,297 kg + 16% 173,265 kg
Reported seizure of heroin 773 kg - 4% 745 kg
2
Reported destruction of illegal laboratories 1,865 + 5% 1,953
1
Cocaine production for 2004 has been revised following the field findings obtained in 2005.
2
Includes laboratories processing coca paste/base, cocaine hydrochloride, heroin, morphine, potassium, permanganate,
and non specified.
105
Abbreviations
CICAD Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission

COP Colombian Pesos
DANE National Department of Statistics
DEA US Drugs Enforcement Agency
DIRAN Colombian Anti-Narcotics Police
DNE National Narcotics Office
DNP National Planning Department
ICMP Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme
INCB International Narcotics Control Board
IDB Inter-American Development Bank
IDP Internally Displaced People
PDA Alternative Development Programme
PCI Presidential Programme against Illicit Crops
RSS Colombian Social Solidarity Net
SIMCI II Integrated Illicit Crops Monitoring System
UIAF Special Administrative Unit on Information and Financial Analysis
UNODC United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.
US$ 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 – ICMP)
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.
106
TABLE OF CONTENT
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 108

2 FINDINGS.............................................................................................................................................. 110
2.1 CULTIVATION .................................................................................................................................. 110
2.1.1 Coca Cultivation....................................................................................................................... 110
2.1.1.1 Regional analysis .......................................................................................................................... 118
2.1.1.2 Meta-Guaviare region.................................................................................................................... 120
2.1.1.3 Pacific region ................................................................................................................................. 122
2.1.1.4 Central region ................................................................................................................................ 124
2.1.1.5 Putumayo-Caqueta region ............................................................................................................ 126
2.1.1.6 Orinoco region ............................................................................................................................... 128
2.1.1.7 Amazonia region ........................................................................................................................... 130
2.1.1.8 Sierra Nevada region .................................................................................................................... 132
2.1.1.9 Possible areas of new cultivation .................................................................................................. 133
2.1.1.10 Coca plant varieties....................................................................................................................... 135
2.1.1.11 Coca cultivation and poverty ......................................................................................................... 139
2.1.1.12 Coca cultivation and displacement................................................................................................ 141
2.1.1.13 Coca cultivation and the forest warden families programme ........................................................ 143
2.1.1.14 Coca cultivation in National Parks................................................................................................. 145
2.2 NEW FINDINGS ON YIELD AND PRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 149
2.2.1 Coca leaf yield and coca leaf production ................................................................................. 149
2.2.2 Annual yield ............................................................................................................................. 151
2.2.3 Coca leaf, coca paste and base production............................................................................. 159
2.2.4 Revised potential cocaine production ...................................................................................... 164
2.3 PRICES .......................................................................................................................................... 166
2.3.1 Coca leaf, coca base and cocaine prices ................................................................................ 166
2.4 REPORTED AERIAL SPRAYING AND MANUAL ERADICATION................................................................ 172
2.5 REPORTED SEIZURE ....................................................................................................................... 176
Index of Maps
Map 1: Coca cultivation density in Colombia, 2005 ............................................................................ 109

Map 2: Coca cultivation density change in Colombia, 2004-2005 ..................................................... 112
Map 5: Changes in coca cultivation in Colombia, 2001- 2005............................................................ 115
Map 6: Coca cultivation by region in Colombia, 2001-2005 ............................................................... 117
Map 7: Coca cultivation density in the Meta-Guaviare region, Colombia 2005................................ 119
Map 8: Coca cultivation density in the Pacific region, Colombia 2005 ............................................. 121
Map 9: Coca cultivation density in the Central region, Colombia 2005 ............................................ 123
Map 10: Coca cultivation density in the Putumayo-Caqueta region, Colombia 2005........................ 125
Map 11: Coca cultivation density in the Orinoco region, Colombia 2005........................................... 127
Map 12: Coca cultivation density in the Amazonia region, Colombia 2005 ....................................... 129
Map 13: Coca cultivation density in the Sierra Nevada region, Colombia 2005 ................................ 131
Map 14: Distribution of coca plants varieties in Colombia, 2005 ........................................................ 134
Map 15: Index of livelihood conditions by department in 2003 and coca cultivation in Colombia,
2005 138
Map 16: Internal people displaced because of violence between 2000 and 2005.............................. 140
Map 17: Forest Warden Families Programme and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005 .................... 142
Map 18: National Parks and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005......................................................... 144
Map 19: Aerial perspective of the National Park Sierra de La Macarena and coca cultivation in 2005.
Map 20: Coca yield by region in Colombia, 2005 .................................................................................. 148
Map 21: Annual coca leaf production in Colombia, 2005 ..................................................................... 158
Map 22: Aerial spraying and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005........................................................ 174
Map 23: Destruction of clandestine laboratories and coca cultivation in Colombia, 2005............... 178
Map 24: Drug seizures by department and by drug type, Colombia 2005.......................................... 180
107
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 its 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.
108
Map 1: Coca cultivation density in Colombia, 2005
75°W 70°W
Colombia
Caribbean Sea
La
South America Guajira
Barranquilla
Atlántico Magdalena
Cartagena
10°N
10°N
Cesar
Río Ma
g da
lena
PA
NA Sucre
VENEZUELA
M
Norte de
A
Córdoba Bolívar
Santander
Cucutá
Arauca
Antioquia
Santander Arauca
Río Ca uca
Puerto
o
trat
R í o A rauc a Carreño
Río A
Medellín
co
o
Río Orin
Boyacá
Chocó Casanare e ta
Caldas
oM
Rí
5°N
5°N
Risaralda Vichada
Cundinamarca
Pacific Quindío ichada
Bogotá Río V
Ocean
Tolima
iare
Valle G uav
Cali Meta Río
na
le Neiva a
nírid Guainía
oI
a
ag d
San José Rí
Cauca Popayán
M
Río
Huila
Tumaco Guaviare
Nariño Florencia
Pasto Mitú
Vaupés
Caquetá
Putumayo
Puerto
Asís
0°
0°
Río
Ca quet
á
R ío
P
u tu
ma
ECUADOR yo
Amazonas
BRAZIL
Cultivation density PERU

(ha/km²) Rí Am
a
o
zo
n as
0.1 - 1.0
1.1 - 4.0 Leticia
> 4.0 0 150 300
km
5°S
5°S

109
2 FINDINGS
2.1 CULTIVATION
2.1.1 COCA CULTIVATION
In 2005, the total area under coca cultivation in Colombia increased by 6,000 hectares, a 8%
increase compared to previous 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
100,000
Hectares
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
-
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Hectares 51,000 67,000 79,000 102,000 160,000 163,000 145,000 102,000 86,000 80,000 86,000
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.
110
Table 1: Stable and new fields of coca bush in 2005
Identified in 2004 and 2005 Not detected in 2004 Total 2005
Region % of % of % of % of
Number Area Number Area Total Total Area
total total total total
of fields (hectares) of fields (hectares) Fields (hectares)
fields area fields area
Meta-Guaviare 7,958 42 7,896 30 10,801 58 18,066 70 18,759 25,963
Pacific 5,609 33 3,829 22 11,551 67 13,803 78 17,160 17,633
Central 4,067 30 2,662 17 9,340 70 12,970 83 13,407 15,632
Putumayo-
2,969 27 2,831 20 8,028 73 11,121 80 10,997 13,951
Caquetá
Orinoquia 2,386 49 3,076 32 2,488 51 6,634 68 4,874 9,709
Amazonia 575 38 708 31 953 62 1,612 70 1,528 2,320
Sierra Nevada 195 34 112 21 386 66 430 80 581 542
TOTAL 23,759 35 21,114 25 43,547 65 64,636 75 67,306 85,750
The comparison of the position of the coca fields in 2004 and 2005 revealed that about 65% of 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 all of these coca fields can be qualified
as new fields planted in 2005.
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 New in 2005 Total 2005
Region % of % of % of % of
Number Area Number Area Total Total Area
total total total total
of fields (hectares) of fields (hectares) Fields (hectares)
fields area fields area
Meta-Guaviare 12,728 68 12,516 48 6,031 32 13,446 52 18,759 25,963
Pacific 8,750 51 5,744 33 8,410 49 11,888 67 17,160 17,633
Putumayo-
6,160 56 6,178 40 4,837 44 9,454 60 10,997 15,632
Caquetá
Central 5,806 43 3,387 24 7,601 57 10,565 76 13,407 13,951
Orinoquia 3,106 64 4,487 46 1,768 36 5,223 54 4,874 9,709
Amazonia 786 51 997 43 742 49 1,323 57 1,528 2,320
Sierra Nevada 259 45 151 28 322 55 391 72 581 542
TOTAL 37,595 56 29,840 39 29,711 44 52,290 61 67,306 85,750
The analysis of the census data also showed that the average coca field size decreased from 1.3
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.
111
Map 2: Coca cultivation density change in Colombia, 2004-2005

75°W 70°W
Colombia
Caribbean Sea
South America La
Guajira
Barranquilla
Atlántico
Magdalena
Cartagena
10°N
10°N
Cesar
PA
NA Sucre
Bolívar
VENEZUELA
M
A
Córdoba Norte de
Santander
Cucutá
Arauca
Antioquia Santander Arauca Puerto

Medellín Carreño
Chocó Boyacá
Casanare
Risaralda Caldas Vichada
5°N
5°N
Cundinamarca
Pacific Quindío
Bogotá
Ocean
Tolima
Valle
Cali Meta
Huila Neiva
Cauca Guainía
San José
Popayán
Tumaco
Florencia Guaviare
Nariño
Mitú
Pasto
Caquetá
Vaupés
Puerto
Asís Putumayo
0°
0°
ECUADOR
Amazonas
BRAZIL
Strong decrease
Decrease PERU
Stable
Increase
Leticia
Strong increase
0 150 300
International boundaries km
5°S
5°S
Geographic coordinates WGS 84

75°W 70°W

112
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)
% of
Mar- Aug- Nov- Dec- Dec- Dec- Dec- % Change
Department 2005
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2004-2005
total
Meta 11,384 11,123 11,425 9,222 12,814 18,740 17,305 -8% 20%
Nariño 3,959 9,343 7,494 15,131 17,628 14,154 13,875 -2% 16%
Putumayo 58,297 66,022 47,120 13,725 7,559 4,386 8,963 104% 10%
Guaviare 28,435 17,619 25,553 27,381 16,163 9,769 8,658 -11% 10%
Vichada 4,935 9,166 4,910 3,818 4,692 7,826 67% 9%
Antioquia 3,644 2,547 3,171 3,030 4,273 5,168 6,414 24% 7%
Caquetá 23,718 26,603 14,516 8,412 7,230 6,500 4,988 -23% 6%
Bolívar 5,897 5,960 4,824 2,735 4,470 3,402 3,670 8% 4%
Córdoba 1,920 117 652 385 838 1,536 3,136 104% 4%
Cauca 6,291 4,576 3,139 2,120 1,443 1,266 2,705 114% 3%
Arauca 978 2,749 2,214 539 1,552 1,883 21% 2%
Chocó 250 354 453 323 1,025 219% 1%
Santander 2,826 415 463 632 1,124 981 -13% 1%
Amazonas 532 784 625 783 897 15% 1%
N. de Santander 15,039 6,280 9,145 8,041 4,471 3,055 844 -73% 1%
Guainía 853 1,318 749 726 721 752 4% 1%
Vaupés 1,014 1,493 1,918 1,485 1,157 1,084 671 -38% 1%
Boyacá 322 245 118 594 359 342 -5% 0.4%
Guajira 321 385 354 275 556 329 -41% 0.4%
Magdalena 521 200 480 644 484 706 213 -70% 0.2%
Caldas 54 358 189 -47% 0.2%
Cundinamarca 66 22 57 57 71 56 -15% 0.1%
Valle del Cauca 76 184 111 37 45 28 -33% 0.03%
TOTAL 160,119 162,510 144,807 102,071 86,340 80,350 85,750 +6.7%
Rounded Total 160,000 163,000 145,000 102,000 86,000 80,000 86,000 + 7%
Department
12 21 22 21 23 23 23
affected
Country coverage 12% 41% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
113
Map 3: Coca cultivation density in Colombia, 2004 Map 4: Coca cultivation density in Colombia, 2005
114
75°W 70°W 75°W 70°W
Colombia Colombia
Caribbean Sea Caribbean Sea
La La
Guajira Guajira
Barranquilla Barranquilla
South America Magdalena South America Magdalena
Atlántico Atlántico
Cartagena Cartagena
Cesar Cesar
10°N
10°N
10°N
10°N
Rí o M
Rí o M
ag ag
dal dal
en a
en a
PA PA
Sucre NA Sucre
NA
VENEZUELA VENEZUELA
Norte de Norte de
Córdoba Bolívar Córdoba Bolívar
Santander Santander
MA
MA
Cucutá Cucutá
Arauca Arauca
Antioquia Antioquia
ato
Santander
ato
Santander Arauca Puerto Arauca Puerto
Atr
Atr
Rí o A rau ca Carreño
Río C auca
Rí o A rau ca Carreño
Río C auca
R ío
R ío
Medellín Medellín oco
oco
Boyacá Boyacá
Río Orin
Río Orin
a Chocó a
et
Chocó
et
Caldas Casanare Caldas Casanare
oM oM
Rí
Rí
5°N
5°N
5°N
5°N
Risaralda Cundinamarca Vichada Risaralda Cundinamarca Vichada
Pacific Bogotá Pacific Bogotá
Quindío ichada Quindío ichada
Río V Río V
Ocean Ocean
Tolima Tolima
re aviare
Valle G uavia Valle Gu
Cali Meta Río Cali Meta Río
len a
len a
a Neiva ida a Neiva a
nírid
gd
gd
o Inír Guainía oI Guainía
San José Rí
Ma
San José Rí
Ma
Cauca Cauca
Popayán Popayán
Río
Rí o
Huila Huila
Tumaco Guaviare Tumaco Guaviare
Florencia Florencia
Nariño Nariño
Pasto Mitú Pasto Mitú
Vaupés Caquetá Vaupés

Putumayo Caquetá Putumayo
Puerto Asís Puerto Asís
0°
0°
0°
0°
Rí o Rí o
C aq u Caqu
et á et á
Rí o
Rí o
Pu Pu
tu tu
m m ayo
ayo ECUADOR
ECUADOR Amazonas Amazonas
Cultivation density BRAZIL Cultivation density BRAZIL

(ha/km²) (ha/km²)
0.1 - 1.0 0.1 - 1.0
PERU PERU
o
1.1 - 4.0 1.1 - 4.0
o
Rí Am Rí Am
az a zo
on
as n as
> 4.0 > 4.0
Leticia
Leticia
International boundaries 0 150 300
International boundaries 0 150 300
km km
Department boundaries Geographic coordinates WGS 84
Department boundaries Geographic coordinates WGS 84
75°W 70°W
°S
75°W 70°W
5°S
5°S
5°S
Source: Government of Colombia - National monitoring system supported by UNODC 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 The boundaries and names shown and the designations used in this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations
Map 5: Changes in coca cultivation in Colombia, 2001- 2005
75°W 70°W
Colombia
Caribbean Sea
La
South America Guajira
Barranquilla
Cartagena
10°N
10°N
Cesar
Río Ma
g da
lena
PA
NA Sucre
Bolívar
VENEZUELA
M
A
Córdoba Norte de
Santander
Cucutá
Arauca
Antioquia
Santander
Río Ca uca
Arauca Puerto
o
trat
Río A
Medellín
co
o
Río Orin
Chocó Boyacá
Casanare e ta
Caldas oM Vichada
Rí
5°N
5°N
Río V
Ocean Bogotá
Tolima
iare
Valle G uav
Cali Meta Río
na
le Neiva a
nírid Guainía
Cauca oI
a
ag d
San José Rí
M
Popayán
Río
Huila
Tumaco
Florencia Guaviare
Nariño
Mitú
Pasto
Caquetá
Vaupés
Puerto
Asís Putumayo
0°
0°
Río
Ca quet
á
R ío
P
u tu
ma
ECUADOR yo
Amazonas
BRAZIL
PERU
Rí Am
a
o
zo
n as
Abandonned coca fields
Stable coca fields Leticia
New coca fields 0 300
150
International boundaries km
5°S

5°S

115
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 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Table 4: Coca cultivation in the Andean region 1995 - 2005 (in hectares) (please note Bolivia 2002
number)
% Change
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
2004-2005
Bolivia 48,600 48,100 45,800 38,000 21,800 14,600 19,900 21,600 23,600 27,700 25,400 -8%
Peru 115,300 94,400 68,800 51,000 38,700 43,400 46,200 46,700 44,200 50,300 48,200 -4%
Colombia 50,900 67,200 79,400 101,800 160,100 163,300 144,800 102,000 86,000 80,000 86,000 8%
Total 214,800 209,700 194,000 190,800 220,600 221,300 210,900 170,300 153,800 158,000 159,600 1%
116
Map 6: Coca cultivation by region in Colombia, 2001-2005
75°W 70°W
Colombia
Caribbean Sea
La Guajira
540
South America
Barranquilla
Atlántico
Cartagena Sierra Nevada
10°N
10°N
Cesar
Magdalena
PA VENEZUELA
NA Sucre Bolívar
M
Norte de
A
Córdoba Santander
Cucutá
15,630
Arauca
Antioquia Santander
Medellín Arauca
Central Puerto
Carreño
Boyacá
9,710
Chocó Casanare
Caldas
5°N
5°N
Pacific Valle
Quindío Vichada
Orinoco
17,630
Ocean Bogotá
Tolima
Cali
25,960
Meta
Pacific Neiva
Guainía
Huila
Popayán
Cauca
Meta -
Tumaco
Nariño Florencia
Guaviare
Guaviare
Vaupés Mitú
13,950
Pasto Caquetá
Puerto
2,320
Asís
Putumayo
Putumayo -
0°
0°
Caquetá Amazonia BRAZIL
ECUADOR
Amazonas

PERU
2001
2002
2003
2004
Leticia
2005
0 150 300
km
5°S
5°S

117
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 (+ 3,560 hectares), in the
north-eastern part of the country bordering Venezuela, and Putumayo-Caqueta (+ 3,050 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)
%
% of
Change
Region 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2005
2004 -
total
2005
Meta-Guaviare 36,978 36,603 28,977 28,507 25,963 -9% 30%
Pacific 11,171 17,362 19,561 15,789 17,633 12% 21%
Central 18,474 14,829 15,389 15,081 15,632 4% 18%
Putumayo-
Caqueta
61,636 22,137 14,789 10,888 13,951 28% 16%
Orinoco 11,915 7,124 4,357 6,250 9,709 55% 11%
Amazonia 3,768 3,018 2,508 2,588 2,320 -10% 3%
Sierra Nevada 865 998 759 1,262 542 -57% 1%
Rounded Total 145,000 102,000 86,000 80,000 86,000 7% 100%
Figure 3. Coca cultivation in Colombia by region 2001 - 2005 (in hectares)
60,000
50,000
40,000
hectares
30,000
20,000
10,000
-
Meta- Pacific Central Putumayo- Orinoco Amazonian Sierra Nevada
Guaviare Caqueta
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
118
Map 7: Coca cultivation density in the Meta-Guaviare region, Colombia 2005
74°W 72°W Arauca

Antioquia
Santander
A
AM
P AN
6°N
VENEZUELA
6°N
COLOMBIA
Caldas
Boyacá
ECUADOR
BRAZIL
Yopal
PERU Casanare
Cundinamarca
Bogotá
Cabuyaro
Puerto
Gaitán
Cumaral
a
Vichada
ichad
Puerto López Río V
4°N
4°N
Acacias Villavicencio
Guamal eta
San Carlos
M
San Luis de
Río
Tolima Cubarral
Guaroa
El
Castillo San Martín
San
Mesetas Juan
de Arama Meta
Huila Puerto
Lleras Mapiripán
La
Vista
Uribe
Hermosa Río Guavia re
Puerto Puerto
Rico Concordia
San José Guainía

San José
del Guaviare
La a
nírid
Macarena R ío I
El Retorno
2°N
2°N
Guaviare
Calamar
Rí
oV
au p e
s
Miraflores
Miraflores Vaupés Mitú
Vaupés
Caquetá
Cultivation density
(ha/km²)
n
Ca
guá 0.1 - 1.0
Río
1.1 - 2.0
0°
0°
2.1 - 4.0
Río 4.1 - 8.0
Ca q
Putumayo uetá
>8
Amazonas
Río P
u tu
0 100 200
Roads
ma
km
PERU o
y

Meta Guaviare Region
74°W 72°W
Source: Goverment of Colombia - National monitoring system supported by UNODC

119
2.1.1.2 Meta-Guaviare region
Table 6: Coca cultivation in Meta-Guaviare, 1999 – 2005
% Change
Department 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
2004-2005
Meta 11,384 11,123 11,425 9,222 12,814 18,740 17,305 -8%
Guaviare 28,435 17,619 25,553 27,381 16,163 9,769 8,658 -11%
Total 39,819 28,742 36,978 36,603 28,977 28,509 25,970
Annual trend -28% 29% -1% -21% -2% -9%
In 2004 and 2005, the department of Meta remained the department with the largest level of 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 cultivation for both departments and the highest level of
cultivation using high agro-technical efficiency. In Meta department, coca cultivation is also known
to be more sophisticated than in any other department.
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 in Meta department, illustrating the efficiency and sophistication of coca cultivation in this
department
120
Map 8: Coca cultivation density in the Pacific region, Colombia 2005
78°W 76°W Sucre

Montería
PA N A M A
VENEZUELA
Bolívar
COLOMBIA
Córdoba
8°N
8°N
PANAMA
ECUADOR
BRAZIL
PERU
Cultivation density
(ha/km²)
0.1 - 1.0
Antioquia
1.1 - 2.0
Río Cauca
ra t o
2.1 - 4.0
Río A t
4.1 - 8.0 Medellín
6°N
6°N
>8
Quibdó
Department boundaries Chocó
Roads
Pacific Region Caldas
Manizales
Bogotá
Ibagué
Río San J uan Cundinamarca

Tolima
Pacific
4°N
4°N
Ocean
Valle Cali
Neiva
Huila Neiva Meta
Cauca
lena
gd a
Popayán
Ma
Río
2°N
2°N
R
ío
Tumaco
Pa
tí a
Florencia
Nariño
Pasto Mocoa Caquetá
ECUADOR
Putumayo
0 100 200
km gu
o Ca
78°W 76°W Rí
0°
0°

121
2.1.1.3 Pacific region
Table 7: Coca cultivation in the Pacific Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)
%
Change
Department 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
2004-
2005
Nariño 3,959 9,343 7,494 15,131 17,628 14,154 13,875 -2%
Cauca 6,291 4,576 3,139 2,120 1,443 1,266 2,705 114%
Chocó 250 354 453 323 1,025 219%
Valle del
Cauca
76 184 111 37 45 28 -33%
Total 10,250 14,245 11,171 17,362 19,561 15,788 17,633
Annual trend 39% -22% 55% 13% -19% 12%
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.
122
Map 9: Coca cultivation density in the Central region, Colombia 2005

76°W Santa Marta 74°W 72°W
Barranquilla
A MA
La Guajira
P AN VENEZUELA
Atlántico Valledupar
Cartagena
COLOMBIA
Cesar
10°N
10°N
ECUADOR
BRAZIL Magdalena
PERU
Río Mag da
VENEZUELA
le n a
Sincelejo
Caribbean Sea
Sucre o
b
Río Catatum
Montería
Catatumbo
Bolívar Norte de Santander

Córdoba
8°N
8°N
Cucutá
Norte de Antioquia
Sur de Bolívar
Bucaramanga
Antioquia Santander
Arauca
Río Cauca
ato
Río A tr
Medellín
6°N
6°N
Quibdó
Chocó Boyacá
Risaralda Caldas
Yopal Casanare
Manizales
Cultivation density Bogotá Cundinamarca

(ha/km²)
0.1 - 1.0 Ibagué
San Ju an
1.1 - 2.0
Tolima Villavicencio
2.1 - 4.0
4°N
4°N
4.1 - 8.0
eta
M
>8
Río
Meta
Valle
Roads 0 100 200
km
Central Region Geographic coordinates WGS 84
76°W Huila 74°W
Cauca
123
2.1.1.4 Central region
Table 8: Coca cultivation in the Central Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)
% Change
Department 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
2004-2005
Antioquia 3,644 2,547 3,171 3,030 4,273 5,168 6,414 25%
Bolivar 5,897 5,960 4,824 2,735 4,470 3,402 3,670 8%
Cordoba 1,920 117 652 385 838 1,536 3,136 101%
Santander - 2,826 415 463 632 1,124 981 -13%
Norte Santander 15,039 6,280 9,145 8,041 4,471 3,055 844 -72%
Boyacá - 322 245 118 594 359 342 -5%
Caldas - - - - 54 358 189 -47%
Cundinamarca - 66 22 57 57 71 56 -15%
Total 26,500 18,118 18,474 14,829 15,389 15,073 15,632
Annual trend -32% 2% -20% 4% -2% 4%
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.
124
Map 10: Coca cultivation density in the Putumayo-Caqueta region, Colombia 2005
76°W 74°W 72°W
Boyacá
Caldas Yopal Casanare
P A N AMA
VENEZUELA Manizales
Chocó
Bogotá Cundinamarca
COLOMBIA Ibagué
ECUADOR Villavicencio
BRAZIL
4°N
4°N
a
et
PERU
Río M
Valle Cali Tolima Meta
Neiva
Huila
Río Gua viare
Cauca
San José
a
alen
Popayán
agd
d a
I níri
M
Río
Río
2°N
2°N
Guaviare
Puerto
Rico
El Doncello
Florencia
Florencia El Paujil
Rí
Va
o
Mocoa San José de up és
Nariño la Fragua Morelia
Miraflores
Colón San Albania San Vicente
La Montañita del Caguán
Pasto Francisco Mocoa Curillo Milán
Valparaiso
Santiago
Villa Garzón Solita
Caquetá
Puerto Puerto Vaupés
Orito Caicedo Guzmán Cartagena del Chaira
Puerto Asís Putumayo

Valle del Puerto Asís Puerto
Guamuéz Leguizamo
San Miguel
g uán
Solano
Ca
R ío
0°
0°
Río
Ca q
uetá
R ío P
ut u
ay
m
Amazonas
ECUADOR
Cultivation density
2°S
2°S
(ha/km²)
0.1 - 1.0
1.1 - 2.0
2.1 - 4.0
4.1 - 8.0
>8 PERU
nas
a zo
Municipality boundaries Am
Río
0 100 200
Roads km
Putumayo Caquetá Region
76°W 74°W 72°W

125
2.1.1.5 Putumayo-Caqueta region
Table 9: Coca cultivation in the Putumayo-Caqueta Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)
% Change
Department 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
2004-2005
Caquetá 23,718 26,603 14,516 8,412 7,230 6,500 4,988 -23%
Putumayo 58,297 66,022 47,120 13,725 7,559 4,386 8,963 105%
Total 82,015 92,625 61,636 22,137 14,789 10,886 13,951
Annual
trend
13% -33% -64% -33% -26% 28%
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
126
Map 11: Coca cultivation density in the Orinoco region, Colombia 2005
72°W 70°W 68°W

Cultivation density
(ha/km²)
MA
P AN A VENEZUELA 0.1 - 1.0
1.1 - 2.0
2.1 - 4.0
COLOMBIA
4.1 - 8.0
>8
ECUADOR
BRAZIL
8°N
PERU
8°N
Cucutá
Roads
Orinoco Region
VENEZUELA
Arauca
Saravena
Arauca
Fortul Arauca Arauquita
Tame
Puerto Cravo
Rondón Norte
Río
Ara u ca
Puerto Carreño
6°N
6°N
Puerto
Carreno
Río Orinoco
omo
La Primavera Río T
Casanare
Santa
Rosalía
Vichada
a
ichad
Río V
Cumaribo
4°N
4°N
eta
Puerto Inírida
M
Río
Meta
Guainía
Río Guavi are
da
I níri
Río
Guaviare
2°N
2°N
0 100
Vaupés 200
km
72°W Geographic coordinates WGS 84 70°W BRAZIL 68°W

127
2.1.1.6 Orinoco region
Table 10: Coca cultivation in the Orinoco Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)
% Change
Department 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
2004-2005
Vichada - 4,935 9,166 4,910 3,818 4,692 7,826 67%
Arauca - 978 2,749 2,214 539 1,552 1,883 21%
Total - 5,913 11,915 7,124 4,357 6,244 9,709 -
Annual
- - 102% -40% -39% 43% 56% -
trend
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
128
Map 12: Coca cultivation density in the Amazonia region, Colombia 2005
74°W 72°W
Arauca
70°W 68°W
Rí o A r auca
Santander Puerto
6°N
6°N
Carreño
Casanare
A
P A N AM
VENEZUELA
Boyacá
Rí o Orinoco
Yopal
COLOMBIA
Vichada
Cundinamarca
ECUADOR
Bogotá a
ichad
BRAZIL
R ío V VENEZUELA
PERU
4°N
4°N
eta
M Puerto Inírida
Río
Meta Inirida Cacahual

ida
Iní r
Barranco Río
Mina
Río Gu aviare
Puerto
San José Morichal Colombia
Nuevo Guainía San Felipe
Pana
2°N
2°N
Pana
Guaviare
Papunahua
Miraflores
Río Mitú La
Carurú Va Mitú Guadalupe
u pé
s
Yavarate
Vaupés
Caquetá
u án
ag
oC Pacoa
Rí La
Rí o
0°
0°
Victoria
A
ap
p
o ris
Mirití
Paraná
Puerto
Rí o
Alegría
P
t
u
ma Puerto Taraira
u
yo
Santander
La Pedrera
Río
La
Chorrera
C aquetá BRAZIL
Rí o
ara
g I
Para
na
Puerto
Amazonas
2°S
2°S
Arica
El
Encanto
PERU
Tarapaca
Cultivation density
(ha/km²) Leticia
Puerto
0.1 - 1.0 Nariño
1.1 - 2.0 Rí
o Amazonas
2.1 - 4.0
4°S
4°S
4.1 - 8.0
Leticia
>8
Municipality boundaries 0 100 200
Roads Geographic coordinates WGS 84
km
Amazon Region
74°W 72°W 70°W 68°W

129
2.1.1.7 Amazonia region
Table 11: Coca cultivation in the Amazonia Region, 1999-2005 (hectares)
% Change
Department 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
2004-2005
Vaupés 1,014 1,493 1,918 1,485 1,157 1,084 671 -38%
Amazonas - - 532 784 625 783 897 15%
Guainía - 853 1,318 749 726 721 752 5%
Total 1,014 2,346 3,768 3,018 2,508 2,588 2,320
Annual trend - - 61% -20% -17% 3% -10%
Like Putumayo-Caqueta region, the departments of 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
130
Map 13: Coca cultivation density in the Sierra Nevada region, Colombia 2005
74°W 73°W 72°W
13°N
13°N
MA
P AN A VENEZUELA
COLOMBIA
n Sea
ECUADOR
BRAZIL La Guajira
PERU Caribbean Sea
12°N
12°N
Riohacha
Santa Marta
11°N
11°N
Sierra Nevada
de Santa Marta
Magdalena
Valledupar
10°N
10°N
Cesar Gulf of
Río M agdale
Maracaibo
na
bo VENEZUELA
9°N
tum
9°N
Sucre ata
Río C
Norte de Santander Cultivation density

Bolívar (ha/km²)
0.1 - 1.0
1.1 - 2.0
8°N
8°N
2.1 - 4.0
Antioquia 4.1 - 8.0
Cucutá
>8
0 50 100 Department boundaries
km
Geographic coordinates WGS 84 Roads
74°W Santander73°W 72°W
Sierra Nevada Region
131
2.1.1.8 Sierra Nevada region
Table 12: Coca cultivation in the Sierra Nevada region, Colombia, 1999 – 2005
% Change
Department 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
2004-2005
Magdalena 521 200 480 644 484 706 213 -70%
Guajira - 321 385 354 275 556 329 -41%
Total 521 521 865 998 759 1,262 542
Annual trend - 0% 66% 15% -24% 66% -57%
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
132
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 hectares
Amazonas 116
Vichada 79
Vaupés 77
Meta 4
Total 276
133
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
135
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
136
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
137
Map 14: Index of livelihood conditions by department in 2003 and coca cultivation in Colombia,
2005
75°W 70°W
Colombia
Caribbean Sea
South America
La Guajira
Barranquilla
Cartagena
10°N
Cesar
10°N
Río Ma
da
g len a
PA VENEZUELA
NA Sucre Bolívar
M
Norte de
A
Córdoba Santander
Cucutá
Chocó Santander Arauca
Antioquia
Río Ca uca
o
trat
Arauca Puerto
Medellín
Río A
co
Río Orino
Vichada
Boyacá
Caldas eta
Casanare oM
Cundinamarca
Rí
5°N
5°N
Risaralda Bogotá
Pacific
ichada
Río V
Ocean Quindío
Tolima
Valle iare
G uav
Cali Río
Meta
Huila
San
na
le rida
Neiva José Iní
a
ío
ag d
Popayán Guaviare
R
Guainía
M
Río
Cauca
Tumaco
Florencia
Nariño
Mitú
Pasto
Puerto Asís
Caquetá
Vaupés
Putumayo
0°
0°
Río
Ca quet
á BRAZIL
R ío
utu
P
ECUADOR ma
yo
Amazonas
Index of livelihood conditions*

by department as of 2003
PERU
55 - 70 %
70 - 80 %
80 - 100 % Rí o Ama
zo
No data na
s
Leticia
0 150 300
Coca cultivation 2005 km
5°S
5°S

*
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
138
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 Country Urban area Rural area

Poverty 2002 57,0 50,2 75,1
2003 50,7 46,3 62,9
2004 52,7 47,3 67,5
2005 49,2 42,3 68,2
Extreme 2002 20,7 15,5 34,9
poverty 2003 15,8 12,6 24,6
2004 17,4 13,7 27,6
2005 14,7 10,2 27,5
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
139
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
450.000 180.000
400.000 160.000
350.000 140.000
300.000 120.000
people displaced
250.000 100.000
hectare
424.075
200.000 80.000
374.856
331.234
150.000 60.000
220.111
100.000 40.000
161.921
131.716
50.000 20.000
- -
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
People displaced Coca cultivation

Source: RSS – 2001 to 2004 data revised in 2005
141
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
143
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)
2003 2004 2005 % Change

National Parks
(hectares) (hectares) (hectares) 2004-2005
Sierra La Macarena 1,152 2,707 3,354 24%
Nukak 1,469 1,043 930 -11%
La Paya 310 230 728 217%
Paramillo 110 461 686 49%
Tinigua 340 387 155 -60%
Sierra Nevada 212 241 95 -61%
Puinawai 33 139 60 -57%
Catatumbo-Bari 129 107 55 -49%
Alto Fragua 8 14 25 79%
Munchique 1 8 13 63%
Los Picachos 13 15 7 -53%
Yariguíes - - 2 -
Sanquianga 7 - - -
Farallones 2 - - -
Tayrona 4 1 - -
Total 3,790 5,353 6,110
Rounded total 3,800 5,400 6,100 14%
SIMCI and the National Parks Administrative Unit published at the end of 2005 a Multitemporal
Analysis about the impact of coca crops in National Parks in the period 2001-2005. On this
occasion, the borders of the Parks were edited which produced slight adjustments in the coca
cultivation estimates within these parks.
145
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
146
Map 18: Aerial perspective of the National Park Sierra de La Macarena and coca cultivation in 2005
147
Map 19: Coca yield by region in Colombia, 2005
75°W 70°W
Colombia
Caribbean Sea
South America 1610 5400
ÔE ÔE ÔE Ô
E
3.4 harvest/year
Sierra Nevada
10°N
10°N
Río Ma
g da
len a
PA VENEZUELA
NA
1010 4600
ÔE ÔE ÔE ÔE ÔE
M
A
4.5 harvest/year
1960 6600
Catatumbo
ÔE ÔE ÔE
3.3 harvest/year
Ô
E
Sur de Bolivar
Río Ca uca
o
trat
Río A
R í o A rauc a
co
o
Río Orin
eta
oM 1300 7100
ÔE ÔE ÔE ÔE ÔE Ô
Rí
5°N
5°N
Pacifico
Pacific E
da
ichaharvest/year
5.4
Río V
Ocean Orinoco
iare
G uav
Río
1490 9900
ÔE ÔE ÔE ÔE ÔE ÔE ÔE
na
le a
nírid
960 2600 oI
a
ag d
Rí
ÔE ÔE ÔE
M
Río
6.6 harvest/year
2.5 harvest/year Meta - Guaviare
1440 5600
ÔE ÔE ÔE ÔE
3.9 harvest/year
Putumayo - Caqueta
0°
0°
Río
Ca quet
á
R ío
Pu
tum
ECUADOR a yo
Annual yield per hectare

BRAZIL
PERU
ÔE
kg/ha/harvest kg/ha/year harvest/year Rí o Ama
zo
na
s
0 150 300
Region Regions for coca leaf yield survey km
5°S
5°S

148
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 16: Regional average coca leaf yield per harvest by region (from weighing of samples)
Lowest limit of Highest limit of

Avg Yield per
Sample size confidence confidence Coefficient
harvest
Region interval interval of variation
Plots (CV in %)
Fields (kg/hectares) (kg/hectares) (kg/hectares)
weighted
Sur de Bolivar 55 55 1,960 1,740 2,180 5.7%
Sierra Nevada 45 90 1,607 1,530 1,690 2.6%
Meta-Guaviare 103 206 1,489 1,430 1,550 2.1%
Putumayo-Caqueta 80 80 1,444 1,330 1,550 3.8%
Orinoco 50 100 1,302 1,230 1,370 2.7%
Catatumbo 45 45 1,012 910 1,110 5.0%
Pacific 85 170 964 900 1,020 2.9%
All regions 463 746 1,360 1,340 1,380 1.4%
149
Figure 5. Regional averages of coca leaf yield per harvest, framed by their confidence
interval (kg/hectares)
2,300
2,100
1,960
1,900
1,700
1,607
1,500
kg/ha
1,489 1,444
1,300 1,302
1,100
1,012
964
900
700
500
Sur de Sierra Meta- Putumayo- Orinoco Catatumbo Pacific
Bolivar Nevada Guaviare Caqueta
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 17: Comparison between average yields obtained from weighing of samples and average
yields as reported by farmers.
Average fresh coca leaf yield from Average fresh coca leaf yield from
weighing of samples interviews
Region
# fields Average # fields Average
(kg/hectares) (kg/hectares)
Sur de Bolivar 55 1,960 224 1,606
Sierra Nevada 45 1,607 148 1,462
Putumayo-Caqueta 80 1,444 295 1,273
Catatumbo 45 1,012 141 1,100
Pacific 85 964 342 815
Orinoco 50 1,302 248 1,365
Meta-Guaviare 103 1,489 348 1,289
All regions 463 1,360 1746 1,244
Figure 6. Comparison between average yields obtained from weighing of samples and
average yields as reported by farmers.
2.500
2.000
1.500
kg/ha
810
1.000
1.610
1.610
1.460
1.490
1.440
1.300
1290
1.960
1.270
1360
1.010
1.100
960
500
0
Sur de Sierra Putumayo- Catatumbo Pacific Orinoco Meta-
Bolivar Nevada Caqueta Guaviare
from weighing of samples from farmers' interviews
150
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 18: Regional average number of annual harvest (from interviews)
Number of Average number Coefficient of variation

Region
Interviews5 of harvests in 2004 (CV in %)
Meta-Guaviare 103 6.6 2.1%
Orinoco 50 5.4 4.5%
Catatumbo 45 4.5 4.1%
Putumayo-Caqueta 80 3.9 3.4%
Sur de Bolivar 55 3.3 4.9%
Sierra Nevada 45 3.4 3.8%
Pacific 85 2.5 4.1%
Country level (weighted) 463 4.5 2.0%
Figure 7. Regional average annual number of harvest, framed within their confidence
intervals
8
7 6.6
# harvest per year
6 5.4
5 4.5
3.9
4 3.4
3.3
3 2.5
2
Meta-Guaviare Orinoco Catatumbo Putumayo- Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Pacific
Caqueta
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
151
Table 19: Coca leaf yields in old and new fields
From satellite
From coca leaf yield survey survey
Average Average
Number of
Fields Number yield per annual Planted area
harvests /
of parcels harvest harvest (ha)
yr
(kg/ha) (kg/ha)
Old fields 679 4.5 1,300 6,300 67,404
New fields 67 3.6 1,500 5,700 18,346
Total 746 4.4 1,400 6,300 85,750
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 20: Calculations for the average regional annual yield of fresh coca leaf (kg/hectares)
Avg annual Lowest annual Highest

Region yield yield annual yield
kg/hectares/yr kg/hectares/yr kg/hectares/yr
Meta-Guaviare 9,900 9,200 10,500
Orinoco 7,100 6,400 7,900
Sur de Bolivar 6,600 5,600 7,800
Putumayo-
5,600 4,900 6,400
Caqueta
Sierra Nevada 5,400 5,000 5,900
Catatumbo 4,600 4,000 5,300
Pacific 2,600 2,300 2,900
Country level 6,300 6,000 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 8. Average annual yields of fresh coca leaf framed by their lowest and highest
estimates (kg/hectares/yr)
13,000
11,000 9,900
9,000
7,100
6,600
kg/ha/yr
7,000 5,500 5,400

4,600
5,000
2,600
3,000
1,000
Meta- Orinoco Sur de Putumayo- Sierra Catatumbo Pacific
Guaviare Bolivar Caqueta Nevada
152
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 21: Average regional annual yield coca leaf in equivalent of sun-dried leaf (kg/hectares)
Sun-dried avg annual yield

Region
(kg/hectares)
Meta-Guaviare 4,200
Orinoco 3,100
Sur de Bolivar 2,800
Putumayo-Caqueta 2,400
Sierra Nevada 2,300
Catatumbo 2,000
Pacific 1,100
All regions 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.
153
Figure 9. Annual coca leaf yield, in sun-dried equivalent, from various regions of
Colombia, Peru and Bolivia
Colombia, Meta-Guaviare 4,200
Peru, Apurimac-Ene 3,627
Colombia, Orinoco 3,100
Peru, Alto Huallaga 2,988
Colombia, Sur de Bolivar 2,800
Bolivia, Chapare 2,764
Colombia, Putumayo-Caqueta 2,400
Colombia, Sierra Nevada 2,300
Colombia, Catatumbo 2,000
Bolivia, Yungas, non-traditional areas 1,798
Peru, La Convención-Lares 1,457
Peru, Palcazu-Pichis-Pachitea 1,433
Peru, Inambari-Tambopata 1,290
Colombia, Pacific 1,000
Bolivia, Yungas, traditional areas 936
Peru, Marañon 860
- 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000
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 22: Comparison of annual coca leaf yield from weighing of samples and from farmers’
interviews
Average fresh coca leaf yield Average fresh coca leaf

from weighing of samples yield from interviews
Region
# fields Average # fields Average
(kg/hectares/yr) (kg/hectares/yr)
Meta-Guaviare 103 9,900 348 8,200
Orinoco 50 7,100 248 7,800
Sur de Bolivar 55 6,600 224 5,200
Putumayo-Caqueta 80 5,600 295 4,600
Sierra Nevada 45 5,400 148 5,100
Catatumbo 45 4,600 141 5,300
Pacific 85 2,600 342 1,700
Country level 463 6,300 1,746 5,700
Figure 10. Comparison of annual coca leaf yield from weighing of samples and from
farmers’ interviews
12,000
10,000
8,000
kg/ha/yr
6,000
9,900
8,200
7,800
7,100
4,000
6,600
5,600
5,400
5,200
5,100
4,600
4,600
2,000
2,600
2,600
1,700
0
Meta- Orinoco Sur de Putumayo- Sierra Catatumbo Pacific
Guaviare Bolivar Caqueta Nevada
Avg annual yield from weighing of samples Avg annual yield from farmer's interviews
154
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 23: Loss of coca harvest or reduced productivity, as reported by farmers

% fields with loss
Number of
Region of harvest or
coca fields reduced productivity
Pacific 342 94%
Orinoco 248 52%
Meta-Guaviare 348 44%
Sierra Nevada 148 39%
Catatumbo 141 39%
Putumayo-Caqueta 295 17%
Sur de Bolivar 224 11%
All regions 1,746 47%
For the fields that experienced a loss of harvest or reduced productivity, the most often reported
cause as aerial spraying (on average 49%). 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 24: Causes of loss of harvest, as reported by farmers

Aerial Pest and
Region Climate Other
Spraying diseases
Putumayo-Caqueta 62% 18% 20% -
Catatumbo 96% 0.6% 3% -
Sur de Bolivar 89% 9% - 2%
Sierra Nevada 76% 6% 17% 2%
Orinoco 18% 9% 55% 18%
Meta Guaviare 25% 53% 18% 4%
Pacific 58% 38% 4% 0.6%
All regions 48% 37% 12% 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 affected by aerial spraying
155
Figure 11. Causes of loss of harvest in 2005

120%
100% 96%
89%
80% 76%
62%
58%
60%
40%
25%
18%
20%
0%
Putumayo- Catatumbo Sur de Sierra Orinoco Meta Pacific
Caqueta Bolivar Nevada Guaviare
Aerial spraying Pest 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 25: Comparison of the average annual coca yield from farmers reporting losing a harvest
with farmers reporting no loss of harvest
Without any loss With loss

Region
% kg/hectares/yr % kg/hectares/yr
Putumayo-Caquetá 83% 4,600 17% 4,100
Catatumbo 61% 6,400 39% 3,700
Sur de Bolivar 89% 6,000 11% 2,000
Sierra Nevada 61% 5,800 39% 3,800
Orinoquía 48% 8,700 52% 6,900
Meta Guaviare 56% 8,700 44% 7,000
Pacific 6% 3,000 94% 1,600
All regions 53% 6,900 47% 4,300
Figure 12. 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
kg/ha
5,000
9,000
7,900
7,400
7,300
4,000
6,400
6,200
5,700
3,000
4,600
4,000
3,900
3,700
3,600
2,000
2,000
1,900
1,000
-
Putumayo- Catatumbo Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Orinoquía Meta Guaviare Pacific
Caquetá
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.
156
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 26: Reasons for cultivating coca in the sample group
Easily No other Part of local

Region Profitability
marketable choice culture
Putumayo-Caquetá 28% 28% 25% 20%
Catatumbo 44% 6% 28% 22%
Sur de Bolivar 47% 6% 32% 15%
Sierra Nevada 31% 32% 25% 12%
Orinoquía 41% 27% 18% 13%
Meta Guaviare 36% 17% 26% 21%
Pacífico 32% 24% 37% 7%
All region 34% 21% 28% 17%
On the other hand, only 9% of the coca farmers reported having received any kind of assistance to
stop growing coca plants.
Table 27: Assistance to stop growing coca cultivation in the sample group
Proportion of farmers who Proportion of farmers who

Region received aid to did not receive aid
stop coca cultivation to stop coca cultivation
Putumayo-Caquetá 12% 88%
Catatumbo 0% 100%
Sur de Bolivar 5% 95%
Sierra Nevada 0% 100%
Orinoquía 3% 97%
Meta Guaviare 15% 85%
Pacífico 0% 100%
All regions 9% 91%
157
Map 20: Annual coca leaf production in Colombia, 2005
75°W 70°W
Colombia
Caribbean Sea
South America
La Guajira
2,900
Atlántico
Sierra
Magdalena Nevada
10°N
Cesar
10°N
Río Ma
g da
len a
PA VENEZUELA
NA Sucre
3,900
M
Bolívar
Catatumbo
A
Córdoba
Norte de
Santander
Antioquia
Arauca
Río Ca uca
o
trat
89,800
Santander
Río A
R í o A rauc a
Chocó
Sur de Bolivar co
o
Río Orin
Boyacá
Casanare eta
Vichada
Caldas 68,900
oM
Rí
5°N
5°N
Risaralda
Orinoco
Cundinamarca
Río V
Ocean 45,300
Valle Tolima
Pacifico uav
iare
Meta G
Río
Huila 258,300
na
le a
Meta - Guaviare nírid
oI
a
Cauca
ag d
Rí
M
Río
Guaviare Guainía
Nariño
85,500
12,700
Putumayo
Putumayo - Caqueta
Caquetá
Amazonia
Vaupés
0°
0°
Río
Ca quet
á BRAZIL
R ío
Pu
tum
ECUADOR a yo
Amazonas
Annual coca leaf

production
(metric tons)
PERU
Rí o Ama
Total coca leaf producction zo
na
metric s
Tons.
0 150 300
km
Region Regions
5°S
5°S

158
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 that fresh leaves lose 57% of
moisture content through sun drying, this was equivalent to a total production of 244,000 mt of sun-
dried coca leaf.
The weighted national average for fresh coca leaf yield amounted to 6,600 kg/hectares/year
(production/cultivation), or 2,800 kg/hectares/year in sun-dried equivalent.
Table 28: Calculation of the 2005 production of fresh coca leaf in Colombia
Coca cultivation Annual yield Production % of 2005

Region
(hectares) (kg/hectares/year) (tons) total
Meta-Guaviare 26,087 9,900 258,300 46%
Sur de Bolivar 13,618 6,600 89,900 16%
Putumayo-Caqueta 15,260 5,600 85,500 15%
Orinoco 9,701 7,100 68,900 12%
Pacific 17,434 2,600 45,300 8%
Amazonia6 2,261 5,600 12,700 2%
Catatumbo 846 4,600 3,900 1%
Sierra Nevada 543 5,400 2,900 1%
Country level
(totals and weighted 85,750 6,600 567,400 100%
average)
Figure 13. Production of fresh coca leaf in Colombia 2005
300,000
250,000
200,000
mt
150,000
258,300
100,000
89,900
85,500
50,000
68,900
45,300
12,700
3,900
2,900
-
Meta- Sur de Bolivar Putumayo- Orinoco Pacific Amazonian Catatumbo Sierra Nevada
Guaviare Caqueta
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 Putumyao-Caqueta which has the same environmental
characteristics.
159
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 29: Proportion of farmers processing and not processing coca leaves
% of farmers % of farmers processing % of farmers processing

Region not processing coca leaves into coca leaves into
coca leaves coca paste cocaine base
Putumayo-Caquetá 32% 65% 3%
Catatumbo 71% 20% 9%
Sur de Bolivar 43% 5% 52%
Sierra Nevada 49% 22% 29%
Orinoco 15% 0% 85%
Meta Guaviare 9% 26% 65%
Pacific 68% 31% 1%
All regions 34% 35% 31%
Figure 14. Proportion of farmers processing and not processing coca leaves
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Putumayo- Catatumbo Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Orinoco Meta Guaviare Pacific
Caquetá
% 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.
160
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 30: Average kg of coca paste or base obtained from one metric ton of coca leaf
Number of Avg kg of coca Avg kg of cocaine

Region PAU’s7 process paste per metric base per metric
coca leaf tons of coca leaf tons of coca leaf
Putumayo-Caqueta 152 1.75 1.74
Catatumbo 37 1.39 1.38
Sur de Bolivar 107 1.41 1.41
Sierra Nevada 69 1.45 1.45
Orinoco8 118 - 1.73
Meta Guaviare 285 1.53 1.52
Pacific 79 1.55 1.46
All regions 847 1.63 1.52
Figure 15. 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
1.75
1.74
1.73
1.55
1.53
1.52
0.8
1.46
1.45
1.45
1.41
1.41
1.38
1.39
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
Putumayo- Catatumbo Sur de Bolivar Sierra Nevada Orinoco Meta Guaviare Pacific
Caquetá
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.
161
About 27% of the coca leaf production was processed into cocaine paste. Thus, out of the total
production of 567,400 mt of coca leaf, about 151,000 mt tons were processed into cocaine paste.
Using the conversion rate of 1.63 kg of cocaine paste out of every tons of coca leaf, the total
cocaine paste production from farmers was estimated at 246 mt. This was equivalent to 229 mt of
cocaine base, based on a cocaine paste to base ratio of 93%.
Table 31: Calculation of coca paste production
Proportion of Leaf production

Region Total leaf production farmers producing processed into
cocaine paste cocaine paste
Mt % mt
Meta-Guaviare 258,300 26% 67,200
Sur de Bolivar 89,900 5% 4,500
Putumayo-Caqueta 85,500 65% 55,600
Orinoco 68,900 - -
Pacific 45,300 31% 14,000
Amazonian 12,700 65% 8,300
Catatumbo 3,900 20% 800
Sierra Nevada 2,900 22% 600
Country level 567,400 151,000
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 32: Calculation of cocaine base production
Proportion of Proportion of
Total leaf
Total leaf farmers farmers selling
Region production for
production producing leaf for base
base processing
cocaine base processing
mt % % Mt
Meta-Guaviare 258,300 65% 9% 191,100
Sur de Bolivar 89,900 52% 43% 85,400
Putumayo-Caqueta 85,500 3% 32% 29,900
Orinoco 68,900 85% 15% 68,900
Pacific 45,300 1% 68% 31,300
Amazonia 12,700 3% 32% 4,400
Catatumbo 3,900 9% 71% 3,000
Sierra Nevada 2,900 29% 49% 2,300
Country level 567,400 416,300
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.
162
Table 33: Calculation for estimating the quantity of Permanganate used by farmers
Leaf Avg use of

% of farmers Total use of
production Permanganate per
Region using Permanganate
(mt) tons of leaf
permanganate (mt)
(kg)
Meta-Guaviare 258,300 6.2% 1.4 22.4
Sur de Bolivar 89,900 39.9% 1.1 39.5
Putumayo-Caqueta 85,500 2.1% 1.3 2.3
Orinoco 68,900 29.0% 1.2 24
Pacific 45,300 0.7% 1.1 0.3
Amazonian 12,700 2.1% 1.3 0.3
Catatumbo 3,900 5.0% 1.1 0.2
Sierra Nevada 2,900 26.2% 1.4 1.1
Country level 567,400 90.1
Processing coca leaves into coca paste
Cutting the coca leaves Preparing the coca leaves
The coca leaves mixed with gasoline The cocaine paste
163
2.2.4 REVISED POTENTIAL COCAINE PRODUCTION
The coca yield survey implemented by UNODC 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 the UNODC Annual Reports
Questionnaire was used to revised the cocaine production to 550 metric tons (previous estimate of
440 metric tons).
164
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 16. Cocaine production in Colombia 1995 - 2005 (in metric ton) (note color
change)
800
700
600
500
Metric tons
400
300
200
100
0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Metric tons 230 300 350 435 680 695 827 580 550 640* 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 34: Global potential cocaine production, 1995 – 2005
%
% of
change
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2005
2004-
total
2005
Bolivia 240 215 200 150 70 43 60 60 79 107 90 -16% 10%
Peru 460 435 325 240 175 141 150 165 155 190 180 -5% 20%
Colombia 230 300 350 435 680 695 617 580 550 640 640 0% 70%
Total 930 950 875 825 925 879 827 805 784 937 910 -3% 100%
Source: UNODC, in italic revised figures as of 2005
Figure 17. Global potential cocaine production, 1995 – 2005 (note change in graph)
and 2005 is based on new field research.
1,000
175 190
141 180
800
150
435 165
460 325 240 155
metric ton
600
680 640
400 640
350 695
230 300 435 617 550
580
200
240 215 200

150
79 107 90
70 43 60 60
0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
165
2.3 PRICES
2.3.1 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 sun-
dried 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 35: Coca leaf price (‘000 of COP/kg) in some regions of Colombia, 2005
Weighted
Sample Putumayo Sierra
Months national Centre Pacífico
size Caquetá Nevada
average
January 10 1,920 2,400 2,930 1,880 480
February 8 2,070 2,400 3,200 1,880 800
March 6 2,510 2,400 4,000 2,020 1,600
April 6 2,560 2,400 4,200 2,020 1,600
May 6 2,410 2,400 3,600 2,020 1,600
June 7 2,310 2,240 3,360 2,020 1,600
July 6 2,330 2,400 3,280 2,020 1,600
August 5 2,640 2,800 4,160 2,000 1,600
September 6 3,170 2,200 5,000 2,320
October 6 2,630 3,000 4,000 2,300 1,200
November 7 2,670 3,000 4,200 2,120 1,360
December 9 2,450 3,070 2,800 2,240 1,680
Annual 82 2,470 2,560 3,730 2,070 1,370
Average (COP)
Annual 1.1 1.1 1.6 0.9 0.6
Average (US$)
Source: National Monitoring System Supported by UNODC-SIMCI
Most peasants sell coca paste that they themselves produce in small “kitchen” located on the farm.
The necessary technical know-how was brought to the farmers during the 90’s by drug-traffickers
to facilitate and increase the commercialisation of cocaine
Most coca growers sell their production as coca paste (a product the farmers called "pasta
básica"). It is therefore a fair proxy indicator of the situation prevailing in the Colombia coca
market. But one should take into account that the armed groups that tend to monopolise this trade
often imposed their prices and conditions to the farmers. Therefore prices do not always react
quickly according to the economic law of supply and demand.
Prices of coca paste increased from an average of US$ 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%).
166
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$915 during the same period). Reportedly, these high prices
in Sierra Nevada would be due to the increase in prices of the various chemicals and precursors
necessary to produce the paste, in particular the increase of the prices of gasoline that sometimes
comes from Venezuela.
Table 36: Monthly coca paste price in Colombia 2005 (in '000 COP/kg)
Weighted
Sample Meta – Putumayo- Sur de Sierra
Months national Pacific
size Guaviare Caqueta Bolivar Nevada
average
January 15 2,122 2,300 2,067 1,700 2,166 2,380
February 13 2,093 2,300 2,500 1,700 2,166 1,800
March 14 2,019 2,300 2,100 1,700 2,194 1,800
April 14 2,154 2,400 2,175 1,700 2,194 2,300
May 13 2,124 2,100 2,025 1,500 2,194 2,800
June 14 2,103 2,000 1,900 1,600 2,214 2,800
July 13 2,163 2,300 1,900 1,600 2,217 2,800
August 12 2,260 2,300 2,400 1,600 2,200 2,800
September 13 2,129 2,100 2,300 1,875 2,243 -
October 11 2,115 2,100 2,200 1,675 2,100 2,500
November 14 2,059 2,000 1,900 1,525 2,071 2,800
December 12 1,963 2,000 1,400 1,475 2,140 2,800
Average 158 2,119 2,183 2,072 1,638 2,175 2,507
(COP)
Average 810 940 892 705 937 1,080
(US$/kg)
Source: National Monitoring System Supported by UNODC-SIMCI
Figure 18. 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 M-05 A-05 M-05 J-05 J-05 A-05 S-05 O-05 N-05 D-05
Centre Pacific Putumayo-Caqueta Sierra Nevada Meta-Guaviare
167
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 37: Monthly cocaine base price in Colombia 2005 (in '000 COP/kg)
Weighted
Sample Sur de Putumayo Sierra Orinoc Meta-
Months national Pacific
size Bolivar Caqueta Nevada o Guaviare
average
January 2 2,425 - - 2,650 - 2,200 -
February 2 2,425 - - 2,650 - 2,200 -
March - - - - - - - -
April - - - - - - - -
May 2 2,650 2,650 - - - - -
June 5 2,617 2,900 - - 2,750 2,200 -
July - - - - - - - -
August - - - - - - - -
September 22 2,631 2,867 2,267 2,750 2,475 2,725 2,700
October - - - - - - - -
November - - - - - - - -
December 9 2,443 2,588 2,275 - 2,800 2,150 2,400
Average 42 2,532 2,751 2,271 2,683 2,675 2,295 2,550
(COP/kg)
Average - 1,090 1,190 990 1,150 1,160 990 1,110
(US$/kg)
Figure 19. Comparison of the prices of coca paste and cocaine base in 2005 in US$/kg
1400
1200
1000
800
US$/kg
600 1.190 1.150 1.160

1.080 1.110
937 990 990 940
892
400
705
200
0
Sur de Bolivar Pacific Putumayo- Sierra Nevada Orinoco Meta-Guaviare
Caqueta
Cocaine paste 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
168
Police), and refer to whole sale prices in the main cities. The purity level was not investigated in
this study.
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 (ȡ= 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$ (ȡ= 0.19 for constant prices
between 1994 and 2005).
Table 38: Cocaine HCl price in Colombia 1991 – 2005
Year '000 COP/kg US$/kg
1991 950 1,500

1992 1,020 1,500
1993 1,377 1,750
1994 1,488 1,800
1995 1,232 1,350
1996 1,762 1,700
1997 1,769 1,550
1998 2,101 1,472
1999 2,800 1,592
2000 3,100 1,485
2001 3,599 1,571
2002 4,389 1,532
2003 4,500 1,565
2004 4,600 1,713
2005 4,315 1,860
Sources: DIRAN
Figure 20. 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$/kg
1,500
coca fumigated (ha)
100,000
1,300
80,000
1,100
60,000
900 40,000
700 20,000
500 0
91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05
Aspersion '000 COP/kg US$/kg
169
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 39: Annual income per hectare of coca cultivation for different derivatives of coca leaf
Annual Average annual Annual Value-added

Derivates yield/hectares price income/hectares from coca leaf
kg/hectares US$/kg US$/hectares %
Coca leaf 6,300 1.1 6,930
Coca paste 10.3 910 9,370 35%
Cocaine base 9.6 1,090 10,460 51%
Cocaine hydrochloride 7.7 1,860 14,320 107%
Figure 21. Theoretical annual income per hectare of coca leaf, coca paste, cocaine base
and cocaine hydrochloride
16,000
14,320
14,000
12,000
10,460
10,000 9,370
US$/ha
8,000 6,930
6,000
4,000
2,000
-
Coca leaf Cocaine paste Cocaine base Cocaine
hydrochloride
Based on the total production of each product sold by the farmers and the respective prices in
2005, the total farm-gate income value resulting from coca cultivation was estimated at about US$
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 40: Value of the production of coca leaf and its derivative at farm-gate level
Product kg sold US$/kg US$ value

Leaf 138,657,000 1.1 152,522,700
Paste 246,000 910 223,860,000
Base 428,000 1090 466,520,000
Rounded total
843,000,000
farm-gate value
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.
170
Table 41: Number of families involved in coca cultivation in Colombia in 2005
Coca cultivation person per hectares

Region # family # person
(hectares) family per family
Meta-Guaviare 25,950 5.7 1.3 20,000 114,000
Sur de Bolivar 14,780 4.7 2.1 7,000 32,900
Putumayo-
13,950 4.2 0.7 19,900 83,580
Caqueta
Orinoco 9,710 4.4 3.7 2,600 11,440
Pacific 17,640 5.1 1.2 14,700 74,970
Amazonia 2,330 4.2 0.7 3,300 13,860
Catatumbo 850 4.8 1.3 700 3,360
Sierra Nevada 540 5.1 1.5 400 2,040
All regions 85,750 - 1.25 68,600 336,150
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.
171
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 make
correction for 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.
172
Table 42: Reported aerial spraying and manual eradication of coca cultivation 2005 (ha) by month
Aerial spraying Total
aerial
Manual spraying
Department
Jan Feb Mar Apr Mar Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec eradication and
manual
eradication
Amazonas - - - - - - - - - - - - 216 216
Antioquia - - - 768 7,003 6,490 2,411 161 - - - - 1,677 18,510
Arauca - - - - - - - 1,839 745 - - - 226 2,810
Atlántico - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 3
Bolivar - - - - - 31 538 3,436 2,405 - - - 188 6,597
Boyacá - - - 925 - - - - - - - - 5,233 6,158
Caldas - - - 1,090 - - - - - - - - 575 1,665
Caqueta - - - - - - 974 1,775 784 430 512 978 84 5,536
Cauca - 163 198 - 268 1,597 337 504 - - 132 93 1,383 4,675
Cesar - - - - - - - - - - - - 14 14
Chocó 425 - - - - - - - - - - - 225 650
Cordoba - - - - 1,506 - 261 - - - - - 2,498 4,265
Cundinamarca - - - - 43 - - - - - - - 1,221 1,264
Guajira - - - - 388 - - - - 184 - - 1,681 2,253
Guaviare 3,197 2,988 2,813 501 - - - - - 1,455 910 - 1,888 13,753
Huila - - - - - - - - - - - - 15 15
Magdalena - - - - 324 - - - - 59 - - 1,180 1,563
Meta 2,143 296 71 2,833 1,604 1,504 628 - - 4,170 1,203 - 738 15,191
Nariño 9,953 14,289 21,327 9,881 169 305 - - - - 684 1,023 5,712 63,342
N. Santander - - - - - - - - 899 - - - 2,209 3,108
Putumayo - - - - - - - 2,193 2,420 1,337 3,236 2,577 1,543 13,306
Santander - - - 152 - - 1,117 179 594 - - - 1,145 3,187
Tolima - - - - - - - - - - - - 8 8
Valle 5 - - - - - - - - - - - 1,551 1,556
Vaupés - 340 - - - - - - - - - - - 340
Vichada - - - - - - - - - - - - 74 74
Total 15,723 18,076 24,410 16,150 11,306 9,928 6,266 10,087 7,847 7,636 6,676 4,671 31,287 170,062
Table 43: Aerial Spraying and manual eradication of coca cultivation, by department and year(ha)
Environmental Audit of the
Sources Antinarcotics Police Department
National Narcotics Bureau
Department 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Guaviare 21394 14425 30192 37081 17376 8241 7477 7207 37493 30892 11865
Meta 2471 2524 6725 5920 2296 1345 3251 1496 6973 3888 14453
Caqueta 0 537 4370 18433 15656 9172 17252 18567 1 16276 5452
Putumayo - - 574 3949 4980 13508 32506 71891 8342 17524 11763
Vichada 50 85 - 297 91 - 2820 - - 1446 -
Antioquia - 684 - - - 6259 - 3321 9835 11048 16833
Cordoba - 264 - - - - - 734 550 - 1767
Vaupés - - - 349 - - - - - 756 340
Cauca - - - - 2713 2950 741 - 1308 1811 3292
N. Santander - - - - - 9584 10308 9186 13822 5686 899
Nariño - - - - - 6442 8216 17962 36910 31307 57630
Santander - - - - - 470 - - 5 1855 2042
Boyacá - - - - - 102 - - - - 925
Bolivar - - - - - - 11581 - 4783 6456 6409
Arauca - - - - - - - - 11734 5336 2584
Magdalena - - - - - - - - - 1632 383
Guajira - - - - - - - - - 449 572
Caldas - - - - - - - - - 190 1090
Valle - - - - - - - - - - 5
Chocó - - - - - - - - - - 425
Cundinamarca - - - - - - - - - - 43
Sub-total 23915 18519 41861 66029 43111 58073 94153 130364 132817 136552 138775
Manual Erad. - - - - - - 1745 2752 4011 6234 31287
Total
23915 18519 41861 66029 43111 58073 95898 133116 136828 142,786 170062
eradication
Net cultivation 51000 67000 79000 102000 160000 163000 145000 102000 86000 80000 86000
173
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 22. Comparison of net coca cultivation and accumulated sprayed areas
(hectares).
180,000
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
hectares
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 erradication in Sierra La Macarena National Park.
175
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 23. Number of illegal laboratories destroyed and coca cultivation, 1997-2005
180,000 2,500
160,000
Illegal laboratories destroyed

140,000 2,000
Coca cultivation in ha
120,000
1,500
100,000
80,000
1,000
60,000
40,000 500
20,000
- -
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Coca Cultiation in ha 79,500 102,000 160,119 163,289 144,807 102,071 86,000 80,000 86,000
Illegal laboratories destroyed 392 323 317 647 1,574 1,448 1,489 1,865 1,953
Coca Cultiation in ha Illegal laboratories destroyed

Source: Drug Observatory, DNE
Illegal laboratory (photo DIRAN)
176
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 44: Illegal laboratories destroyed and coca cultivation in 2005
Permanganate of
Cocaine Heroin
Coca paste or base potassium
Department Laboratories laboratories
laboratories destroyed laboratories
destroyed destroyed
destroyed
Nariño 388 41 6 6
Antioquia 303 11 0 4
Magdalena 170 10 0 0
Guaviare 131 4 0 0
Putumayo 125 4 0 0
Cauca 110 11 0 2
Caqueta 90 1 0 0
Meta 65 2 0 1
Valle 54 14 0 0
N. Santander 53 8 0 0
Santander 51 11 0 2
Bolivar 41 2 0 0
Vichada 37 0 0 0
Cordoba 36 1 0 0
Choco 27 0 0 0
Cundinamarca 27 6 0 0
Boyaca 26 4 0 0
Arauca 15 4 0 0
La Guajira 15 2 0 0
Amazonas 13 0 0 0
Caldas 6 6 0 0
Bogota 1 0 0 0
Huila 1 0 0 0
Tolima 1 0 0 1
Cesar 0 9 0 0
Total 1786 151 6 16
Source: DNE
177
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 45: Reported seizures of illicit drugs
Drug unit 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

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

Pacific 43,435 47,137 46,128 61,042
Atlantic 16,065 23,157 30,928 35,856
Total seized by sea 59,500 70,294 77,056 96,898
Total seizures 95,278 113,142 149,297 173,265
% of seizures seized on sea 62% 62% 52% 56%
Source: Colombian Navy, Intelligence Division
Figure 24. Reported seizures of cocaine in the Pacific and Atlantic routes, 2002 - 2005
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
kg
61,042
30,000
47,137
46,128
43,435
35,856
20,000
30,928
23,157
16,065
10,000
-
2002 2003 2004 2005
Pacific Atlantic
179
Table 47: Drug seizures by department and by drug type in Colombia 2005
Cocaine
Coca leaf Cocaine base Basuco Cocaine Heroin Latex Cannabis
Department paste
Kg Galon Kg Galon Kg Galon Kg Kg Galon Kg Kg Galon Kg
Amazonas 715 37 46 1 56 11
Antioquia 75,183 550 579 13,549 5,883 1,070 10,533 2,989 53 8 13,157
Arauca 505 344 356 3 118 50 9
Atlantico 37 17 8,767 13 1,344
Bogota 11 1 81 3,701 22
Bolivar 9,670 575 474 576 530 17 19,309 2,585 28 2,305
Boyaca 4,292 275 1,074 665 6 771 100 0 54
Caldas 206 64 165 60 570 128 1 1,235
Caqueta 8,381 220 84 17,663 715 2 1,289 660 18 26
Casanare 0 2 2 13
Cauca 49,790 4,738 6 684 2,707 62 5,126 3,913 1 33 33,197
Cesar 29 4 1,313 12 261
Choco 111 42 60 258 187 4 541 7,114
Cordoba 13,759 320 2,375 6,026 33 2,147 1,885 418
Cundinamarca 4,866 690 55 270 475 376 8,300 56 482 0 15 11,470
Guainia 20 49 5
Guaviare 100,017 2,595 75 25 3,965 2,515 0 1,411 171 15
Huila 3,777 3 4,382 605 133 349
La Guajira 4,380 467 6 37 2,210 1 3,883
Magdalena 31,056 5,161 55 11 11,161 14,242
Meta 17,137 1,777 2,870 1,279 48 1,260 875 193
Nariño 253,702 25,943 466 4,814 54,746 16 33,835 1,281 11 54 114 666
Putumayo 37,761 1,430 72 1,065 258 2 108 275 1,565 24
Quindio 33 13 8 1 2,290
Risaralda 1,587 130 27 70 9 2,419
San Andres 0 6,268 223
Santander 16,391 1,453 710 40,880 718 13,176 2,350 200 6,811
Sucre 850 9 9 1,346 362
Tolima 484 3,089 5,697 2 3,895
Uraba 5,022 59 0 226 20 44
Valle del
Cauca 1,900 603 1,063 1,332 827 37,704 165 98 4 41,901
Vaupes 0 0
Vichada 26,501 6 2,864 70 0 3,727 1
N. de
Santander 15,156 285 6 1,226 3,512 8 3,207 1,560 15 2,836
Grand Total 682,010 42,211 2,651 25 106,491 82,200 19,607 173,265 16,893 745 1,632 180 150,795
181
PART 5. PERU COCA CULTIVATION SURVEY
Peru Coca Survey for 2005
FACT SHEET – PERU COCA SURVEY FOR 2005
Variation
2004 2005
on 2004
Coca cultivation 50,300 ha - 4% 48,200 ha
Of which in Alto Huallaga 16,900 ha -5% 16,000 ha
Apurimac-Ene 14,700 ha + 6% 15,500 ha
La Convencion y Lares 12,700 ha - 2% 12,500 ha
Elsewhere 6,000 ha - 30% 4,200 ha
Weighted average sun-dried coca leaf yield 2,200 kg/ha 2,200 kg/ha
Potential production of sun-dried coca leaf 110,000 mt - 4% 106,000 mt
Potential production of cocaine hydrochloride 190 mt - 5% 180 mt
in percent of world illicit cocaine production 20 % 20 %
Average farm-gate price of sun-dried coca leaf US$ 2.8/kg US$ 2.9 /kg
Potential farm-gate value of sun-dried coca leaf US$ 304 million US$ 307 million
Farm-gate value of coca leaf production as
0.4% 0.4%
percentage of 2004 GDP (US$ 68.5 billion)
Average price of cocaine paste US$ 640/kg US$ 640/kg
Average price of cocaine hydrochloride US$ 890/kg US$ 890/kg
Reported eradication of coca cultivation 10,257 ha + 19% 12,232 ha
Reported seizure of cocaine paste 6,330 kg - 49% 3,199 kg
Reported seizure of cocaine hydrochloride 7,303 kg - 70% 2,199 kg
185
Abbreviations
ENACO National Coca Enterprise

GIS Geographical Information Systems
GPS Global Positioning System
ICMP UNODC Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme
DIRANDRO Anti-Drugs Directorate, Peruvian National Police
OFECOD Drug Control Office, Peruvian Ministry of Interior
NAS Narcotics Affairs Section, United States Embassy
UNODC United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
CONTRADROGAS Committee for the Fight Against Drug Consumption
DEVIDA National Commission for Development and Life without Drugs
CORAH Control and Reduction of Coca Leaf in Upper Huallaga
Acknowledgements
The following organizations and individuals contributed to the implementation of the 2005 coca
cultivation survey in Peru, and to the preparation of the present report:
Government of Peru:
National Commission for Development and Life without Drugs (DEVIDA)
UNODC:
Humberto Chirinos, Project Coordinator, Peru

Paloma Lumbre, Digital Classification, Cartography and GIS Specialist, Peru
Aldo Gutarra, Multi-spectral Analysis Specialist, Peru
Germán Galvez, Surveying, Cartography and GIS Specialist, Peru
Lorenzo Vallejos, Digital Classification, Cartography and GIS Specialist, Peru
Victor Rojas, Photo-Interpretation and Cartography Specialist, Peru
Carlos Coello, Cartographic Technician, Peru
Aldo Lale-Demoz, UNODC Representative for Peru and Ecuador
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 Peru survey in 2005 was made possible thanks to financial contributions from the Governments
of the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, France and Austria.
186
TABLE OF CONTENT
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 189

2 FINDINGS.............................................................................................................................................. 190
2.1 COCA CULTIVATION .......................................................................................................................... 190
2.1.1 Regional analysis....................................................................................................................... 193
2.1.1.1 Coca cultivation in Alto Huallaga ....................................................................................... 195
2.1.1.2 Coca cultivation in Apurimac-Ene...................................................................................... 203
2.1.1.3 Coca cultivation in La Convencion y Lares........................................................................ 209
2.1.1.4 Coca cultivation in Inambari-Tambopata ........................................................................... 213
2.1.1.5 Coca cultivation in San Gaban .......................................................................................... 214
2.1.1.6 Coca cultivation in Marañon, Putumayo, Huallaga Central and Bajo Huallaga ................ 215
2.1.1.7 Coca cultivation in Aguaytia............................................................................................... 217
2.1.1.8 Coca cultivation in Palcazu – Pichis - Pachitea................................................................. 218
2.1.2 Production coca leaf and derivatives......................................................................................... 222
2.2 PRICES OF COCA LEAF AND ITS DERIVATIVES ..................................................................................... 224
2.3 REPORTED ERADICATION ................................................................................................................. 226
2.4 REPORTED SEIZURE......................................................................................................................... 228
Index of maps
Map 1: Coca cultivation by region in Peru, 2001 – 2005 ...................................................................... 192

Map 2: Coca cultivation density in Alto Huallaga, 2005 ....................................................................... 194
Map 3: Verification overflight with GeoVideo, Alto Huallaga .............................................................. 201
Map 4: Coca cultivation density in Apurimac-Ene, 2005 ..................................................................... 202
Map 5: Verification overflight with GeoVideo, Apurimac ..................................................................... 207
Map 6: Coca cultivation density in La Convención y Lares, 2005 ...................................................... 208
Map 7: Coca cultivation density in Inambari-Tembopata – San Gaban, 2005 ................................... 212
Map 8: Coca cultivation density in Aguaytia and Palcazu-Pichis-Pichitea, 2005.............................. 216
Map 9: Verification overflight with GeoVideo, Aguaytia, Palcazu – Pichis – Pachitea ..................... 221
Map 10: Reported eradication of coca cultivation, Peru, 2005.......................................................... 227
187
188
1 INTRODUCTION
In response to the decisions of the 1998 United Nations General Assembly Special Session on
Drugs, UNODC developed and implemented a global Illicit Crop Monitoring Programme (ICMP).
Through this programme, UNODC supports member states in establishing a crop monitoring
system to monitor illicit cultivation of coca and opium poppy. The Programme is currently
operating in Afghanistan, Myanmar, Laos, Colombia, Peru, Bolivia and Morocco.
In 1998, UNODC started working with DEVIDA to develop a national coca monitoring system in
Peru. Using aerial photography, the project produced a detailed mapping (at 1/20,000 scale) of all
the coca cultivation areas in 2000. Every year since then, satellite images were used to update the
estimates. This report presents the findings of the 2004 Survey.
In Peru, the General Law on Drugs enacted in 1978 prohibits the cultivation of coca and seedlings
in new areas within the national territory. This reference to “cultivation” includes the grafting and
renovation of existing coca bushes. In 1978, another law established the National Coca Enterprise
(ENACO), which has a monopoly on the commercialization and industrialization of the coca leaves.
Therefore, the selling of coca leaves to any party other than ENACO is considered illicit by national
law.
The Government also established in 1996 a Committee for the Fight Against Drug Consumption
(CONTRADROGAS), renamed National Commission for Development and Life without Drugs
(DEVIDA) in 2002. DEVIDA’s objectives are to design, coordinate and implement policies and
activities aimed at national drug control.
Until the mid-1990’s, Peru was the world’s main coca cultivating country. Today, it is the second
major producer of coca far behind Colombia.
The reduction in coca cultivation in Peru in the mid-1990’s was linked to the sharp decline in both
the coca leaf prices and the demand for Peruvian coca leaf. In 1995, trade in coca leaf on the local
market ceased and, from 1996 to 1998, the prices of coca leaf remained lower than its production
costs. Farmers abandoned their coca fields and coca cultivation dropped from 115,300 ha to
38,700 ha, or 66%, between 1995 and 1999.
After 1999, coca prices increased slowly while the prices of licit crops (coffee and cacao)
decreased. Farmers started to re-activate their abandoned coca fields and coca cultivation rose
again in Peru. To some extent, the increase has been contained by the presence of alternative
development projects, as well as the introduction of eradication measures, which include both
forced eradication conducted by CORAH (Ministry of Interior) and voluntary eradication schemes
conducted by DEVIDA.
189
2 FINDINGS
2.1 COCA CULTIVATION
In 2005, the total area under productive coca cultivation in Peru was estimated at 48,200 ha. This
represented a decrease of 4 % over the estimate for 2004 of 50,300 ha.
Figure 1. Coca cultivation in Peru, 1995 – 2005 (ha)
130,000
120,000
110,000
100,000
90,000
80,000
Hectares
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
-
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Hectares 115,300 94,400 68,800 51,000 38,700 43,400 46,200 46,700 44,200 50,300 48,200
Sources United States Department of States National Monitoring System Supported by UNODC
The decrease in coca cultivation observed in 2005 was the results of the eradication campaigns
implemented by CORAH during that year. Eradication efforts were particularly important in two
departments: the department of Puno in San Gabán’s valley, and the department of San Martin in
Alto Huallaga region. As a result, in San Gaban’s valley, coca cultivation decreased from 2,700 ha
as of September 2004 to 300 ha as of July 2005, corresponding to a reduction of 91%. In the
department of San Martin, coca cultivation in the valleys of Mishollo and the region of Pizana-
Polvora, where most the eradication campaign took place, totalled 1,316 ha in 2004, but only 369
ha in 2005, corresponding to a decrease of 72%.
The decrease in coca cultivation in San Gaban and Mishollo/Pizano-Polvara was offset by small
increases in others regions of Atlo Huallaga, and by increases in Apurimac-Ene and Aguaytia.
190
Despite the decrease between 2004 and 2005, coca cultivation in Peru remained the second
largest after Colombia. It represented 30% of the 2005 global coca cultivation, compared to 33% in
2004. A percentage that remained much lower than ten years ago, when coca cultivation in Peru
accounted for 54% of the cultivation in the world.
The decreases in Peru and Bolivia were offset by the increase in coca cultivation in Colombia, and
the global level of coca cultivation remained unchanged between 2004 and 2005.
Figure 2. Coca cultivation in the Andean region, 1995 – 2005 (ha)

250,000
200,000
150,000
hectares
100,000
50,000
0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Table 1: Coca cultivation in the Andean region, 1995- 2005 (ha)

%
change
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
2004-
2005
Bolivia 48,600 48,100 45,800 38,000 21,800 14,600 19,900 21,600 23,600 27,700 25,400 -8%
Peru 115,300 94,400 68,800 51,000 38,700 43,400 46,200 46,700 44,200 50,300 48,200 -4%
Colombia 50,900 67,200 79,400 101,800 160,100 163,300 144,800 102,000 86,000 80,000 86,000 8%
Total 214,800 209,700 194,000 190,800 220,600 221,300 210,900 170,300 153,800 158,000 159,600 1%
191
2.1.1 REGIONAL ANALYSIS
In Peru, most coca cultivation is concentrated in 14 large valleys and 8 smaller valleys. These
valleys can be grouped in three main regions, making up 91% of the total cultivation in 2005: Alto
Huallaga, Apurimac-Ene and La Convención y Lares. Each region has its own characteristics:
While La Convención y Lares is the main supplier of the domestic consumption of coca leaf, coca
cultivation in Apurimac-Ene and Alto-Huallaga are almost exclusively oriented for the production of
cocaine for domestic and international markets.
Coca cultivation in others areas like San Gaban and Inambari-Tambopata at the border with Bolivia,
Aguaytía and Palcazu- Pichis- -Pachitea in the central part of the country, Marañon in the northern
area close to the border with Ecuador and Putumayo of Loreto department close to Colombia, only
accounted for 9% of the 2005 total. Coca cultivation in these areas has mainly been oriented
towards the production of cocaine.
Altogether, in 2005 coca cultivation could be found at various levels in 12 out of the 24
departments of Peru (Cajamarca, Amazonas, La Libertad, San Martín, Loreto, Huanuco, Ucayali,
Pasco, Junin, Ayacucho, Cusco and Puno).
Figure 3. Coca cultivation estimates by region, 2001 – 2005 (ha)

18,000
16,000
14,000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
12,000
10,000
hectares
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
-
Alto Huallaga Apurimac-Ene La Convención - Inambari - Aguaytía Marañon, San Gaban Palcazu -
Lares Tambopata Putumayo Pichis -
Pachitea
Table 2: Coca cultivation estimates by region, 2001 – 2005 (ha)

Change
% of 2005
Region 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2004 –
total
2005
Alto Huallaga 14,481 15,286 13,646 16,900 16,039 -861 33%
Apurimac-Ene 12,600 14,170 14,300 14,700 15,530 830 32%
La Convención - Lares 13,980 12,170 12,340 12,700 12,503 -197 26%
Inambari - Tambopata 2,520 2,430 2,260 2,000 2,250 250 5%
Aguaytía 1,051 1,070 510 500 917 417 2%
Marañon, Putumayo 1,250 1,250 450 500 500 0 1%
San Gaban n.a. n.a. 470 2,700 292 -2,408 1%
Palcazu - Pichis -Pachitea 350 350 250 300 211 -89 0%
Rounded Total 46,200 46,700 44,200 50,300 48,200 -2,100 100%
Source: National monitoring system supported by UNODC
193
Map 2: Coca cultivation density in Alto Huallaga, 2005
76°30'W 76°0'W
Peru
Puerto Alto
Huallaga
Pizana Alto Biavo
Mishollo
8°0'S
8°0'S
Polvora
Pto. Pizana
SAN MARTIN
AL
ollo
Mish
TOH
UA
Bambamarca
LL
AG
A
Tocache
Pucayacu
he
c ac
To
Uchiza
Tocache - Chontayacu
Santa Lucia LORETO
Shunte Tocache
Uc
Uchiza hi za
ote
Cam
8°30'S
8°30'S
Nuevo Progreso
Aspuzana
a cu Camote - Frijol
n tay
o Yanajanca
Ch
ljo
Fri
ca
jan
na
Ya
Huamuco
ana
uz
Asp
Cholon Aspuzana
Jose Crespo y Castillo

UCAYALI
Sta. M
artha
AL
Pendencia - Aucayacu
TO
Aucayacu
HU
Santa Martha
AL
LA
HUANUCO Aucayacu
a
GA
le n
Huavaybamba
da
ag
M
9°0'S
9°0'S
Magdalena
Cochabamba ara ia
Cuch nc
n de
Pe
Arancay Cuchara Hermilio Valdizan
ANCASH Jircan Taz
Rupa-Rupa Pendencia
o
M
on
Cultivation density zo
n
(ha/km 2 ) Cachicoto Luyando
Tulumayo
Monzon
0.1 - 1.0
M
on
zo
1.1 - 2.0
n
Monzon Tingo Maria

Tu
lu
2.1 - 4.0
ma
yo
Singa
4.1 - 8.0 Tantamayo Monzon
> 8.0
Mariano Damaso Beraun
Department
Miraflores Punchao
boundaries
District boundaries 0 20 40
9°30'S
9°30'S
Major road
Puños
km
River
Marias
Village center
76°30'W 76°0'W
Source: Govemment of Peru - National monitoring system supported by UNODC

194
2.1.1.1 Coca cultivation in Alto Huallaga
The Alto Huallaga region is located on the Eastern side of the Andes mountain range, in the high
tropical or subtropical forests of the departments of San Martin and Huamuco. In this region, coca
bush is cultivated between 400 and 1,400 meters above sea level. Deforestation is important in the
region and mostly due to agricultural exploitation of land that should rather be protected or devoted
to forest or forestry activities.
The Alto Huallaga is one of the three main coca growing regions of Peru where coca cultivation
has long been established. The 16,039 ha estimated in 2005 accounted for 33% of the national
total. It represented a 5% decrease compared to 2004, but despite this decrease, Alto Huallaga
remained in 2005 the main centre of coca cultivation in Peru, ahead of Apurimac and La
Convención y Lares.
Between 2004 and 2005, a decrease of 5% was noted in Alto Huallaga. The decrease is mostly the
result of intense eradication campaigns implemented by CORAH and that took place throughout
2005. The eradication campaigns targeted in particular the lower valley of the Mishollo river, the
coca fields around the villages of Pizana, Yanjanca and Huamuco, as well as the lower valley of
the Tocache river (on the left bank). The eradication implemented by CORAH eliminated seedbeds,
new fields that had not yet been harvested, as well as coca fields in full production.
Eradicated coca fields, sector Mishollo, March 2006 Eradicated coca fields, sector Pizana, March 2006
Table 3: Coca cultivation in the valleys of the Alto Huallaga region, 2002 – 2005 (ha)
% of
% change
Coca growing areas 2002 2003 2004 2005 2005
2004-2005
total
Monzon 10,935 10,659 11,325 11,230 -1% 70%
Tulumayo 1,438 1,188 1,507 1,507 0% 9%
Pendencia – Aucayacu 1,147 560 711 632 -11% 4%
Aspuzana 488 373 335 469 40% 3%
Cuchara - Madgalena - S. Marta -
587 510 1,080 1,278 18% 8%
Camote – Frijol – Yanajanca – Huanuco
Tocache – Chontayacu 691 356 677 554 -18% 3%
Mishollo 408 187 -54% 1%
Puerto Pizano 908 182 -80% 1%
Rounded total for Alto Huallaga 15,300 13,600 16,900 16,039 -5% 100%
195
Figure 4. Coca cultivation in the valleys of the Alto Huallaga region, 2002 – 2005 (ha)
12,000
10,000
2002 2003 2004 2005

hectare 8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
Monzon Tulumayo Pendencia - Aspuzana Cuchara - Tocache - Mishollo Puerto
Aucayacu Madgalena - Chontayacu Pizano
S. Marta -
Comote -
Frijol
Beside the decrease in coca cultivation in the areas mentioned above, coca cultivation actually
increase in other areas like in the small valleys of the Aspuzana, Cuchara, Magdalena, Santa
Martha, Camote, Frijol, Huamuco and on the leaf bank of the Huallaga river. In these areas, coca
cultivation increased by about 13% between 2004 and 2005. During the verification over flight, it
was also noted that farmers were preparing new fields, of the size and in environment usually
suitable for coca cultivation. This could be an indication that there could be more coca cultivation in
these areas in 2006.
As was the case in previous years, most of Alto Huallaga’s coca cultivation took place in the
Monzon valley. Monzon accounted for 70% of the coca cultivation of the Alto Huallaga, and 23% of
the national total with 11,230 ha. This amount of coca cultivation was roughly similar to the 11, 325
ha registered in 2004. As there was no eradication efforts conducted in this valley in 2005, nor any
alternative development activities, and that prices of coca leaf and its derivatives remained high,
the difference between 2004 and 2005 was mainly attributed to the different type of satellite
images used for both years. Indeed, in 2005, it was not possible to cover the whole Alto Huallaga
with SPOT5 images like in 2004 because of intense cloud cover and it was therefore decided to
use a combination of IKONOS (more precise but smaller than SPOT images) and Landsat7
images (less precise but larger than SPOT images).
196
Comparison of Landsat7, SPOT5, and IKONOS satellite images over coca growing areas of Peru.
197
Although coca cultivation remained relatively stable between 2004 and 2005 in Monzon area, it
was noted during the verification flights that farmers were preparing new fields suitable for coca
cultivation, and even new fields of less than one year old which were not counted in the 2005
census, but that will be productive in 2006.
Coca fields have long been established in Monzón valley and most of them are over 20 years old.
Typically, coca fields in Monzón valley are less productive than in other parts of Alto Huallaga.
However, there were recent reports over the past three years of farmers interspersing new coca
plants among older coca plants to increase the density and thereby their coca leaf yield.
The economy of Monzón valley is almost exclusively dependent on coca cultivation for the cocaine
market. Up-to-date data on the number of persons living in this valley does not exist. However
local authorities usually mentioned about 35,000 inhabitants living in the valley, but this does not
take into account the external labour recruited for harvesting of coca leaf and processing of coca
paste. The coca farmers organizations of Monzón strongly opposed the efforts of the government
to reduce coca cultivation, and the insecurity and violence brought by these organizations were
constant in 2005. These tense conditions, that prevailed for the past three years, have prevented
the local authorities and the personnel of alternative development projects from entering the valley
and working with the 1,200 people registered as beneficiaries of Alternative Development projects
in Monzón.
Although there was no eradication of coca fields in Monzon valley in 2005, the anti-narcotic police,
DIRANDRO, conducted a number of operations aimed at the destruction of maceration pits,
seizures of materials and destruction of clandestine laboratories.
High density of coca fields and deforestation, Coca fields in various development stages
Cuyacu - Monzon, March 2006 Cashapampa - Monzon, March 2006
High density of coca fields in strong slope, Panoramic view of a small valley with coca fields,
Caunarapa - Monzon, March 2006 Shipaco- Monzon, March 2006
198
Recently planted coca fields. Coca plants are grouped and put in small holes
Caunarapa - Monzon, March 2006
The second most important areas of coca cultivation in Alto Huallaga, but far behind Monzon valley,
is the valley of Tulumayo. In 2005, coca cultivation in this region represented 9% of the coca
cultivation in Alto Huallaga, but only 3% of the national level. Between 2004 and 2005, the level of
coca cultivation remained stable at 1,507 ha. However, it was noted during field visits and
overflights that farmers were preparing new fields, suitable for coca cultivation, an indication that
coca cultivation could increase.
High density of coca fields in production and recently Coca fields in production and recently planted,
harvested, Maronas, March 2006 Supte, March 2006
199
Snapshots of the video taken during the verification flights.
A camera video linked to a GPS was used to verify the initial interpretation of the satellite images.
The yellow dots represent the flight path, the blue arrow the position of the plane when the video
was paused. The white line matches a coca field spotted on the video and the corresponding field
on the satellite image. The verification flights were conducted jointly by UNODC and CADA.
Snapshot of the video taken over Monzon region
Snapshot of the video taken over Tulumayo, Alto Huallaga.
Snapshot of the video taken over Aucayacu, Alto Huallaga.
200
Map 3: Verification overflight with GeoVideo, Alto Huallaga
76°30'W 76°0'W
Peru
Puerto Alto
Alto Biavo Huallaga
Pizana
Mishollo
8°0'S
8°0'S
Polvora
Pto. Pizana
SAN MARTIN
AL
ollo
Mish
TOH
UA
Bambamarca
LL
AG
A
Tocache
Pucayacu
he
c ac
To
Uchiza
Tocache - Chontayacu
Shunte Tocache
Santa Lucia
LORETO
Uc
Uchiza hi za
ote
Cam
8°30'S
8°30'S
Nuevo Progreso
Aspuzana
a cu Camote - Frijol
n tay Yanajanca
o
Ch
ljo
Fri
a
nc
n aja
Ya
ana
Huamuco
uz
Asp
Cholon Aspuzana
Jose Crespo y Castillo UCAYALI

Sta. M
artha
AL
Pendencia - Aucayacu
TO
Aucayac
u
HU
Santa Martha
AL
Aucayacu
LA
HUANUCO
a
le n
GA
Huavaybamba
da
ag
M
9°0'S
9°0'S
Magdalena
Cochabamba ara
Cuch cia
en
nd
Pe
Pendencia Hermilio Valdizan
Arancay Cuchara Rupa-Rupa
ANCASH Jircan Taz
o
Cultivation density M
on
zo
(ha/km 2 ) n
Monzon Cachicoto Luyando Tulumayo
0.1 - 1.0
M
on
zo
1.1 - 2.0
n
Monzon
Tu
Tingo Maria
lu
ma
2.1 - 4.0
yo
Singa
Tantamayo
4.1 - 8.0 Monzon
> 8.0 Mariano Damaso Beraun
MirafloresPunchao wiht geovideo

Overflight
Department boundaries 0 20 40
9°30'S
9°30'S
km
District boundaries
Puños
River Marias
Village center
76°30'W 76°0'W
Source: Govemment of Peru - National monitoring system supported by UNODC

201
Map 4: Coca cultivation density in Apurimac-Ene, 2005
74°0'W 73°30'W
Masamari
Peru
An
Quempiri
apa
ti
Apurimac
Ene
Ene
12°0'S
12°0'S
Pangoa
JUNIN
em piri
Qu
Rio Tambo
Valle
o Esmeralda
ir
Yav
ENE
Ma
nt aro
Canayre
Villa
Virgen
AP
UR
IM
AC
Pichari
Chuimacota Llochegua
ari
h
12°30'S
12°30'S
Pic
Echarate
on
Sivia
Ac
Sivia
Pichari
CUSCO
i ri
imb
Qu
e
Pien
San Francisco Quimbiri

Quimbiri
AYACUCHO
Apurimac
Santillana Sta. Rosa
AP
UR
Ayna
IM
osa
AC
.R
Palmapampa
Sta
Santa Rosa
Huanta
Monterrico
Cultivation density Tambo

(ha/km2) ba
am
0.1 - 1.0 ub San Antonio
ch
un
Ch
1.1 - 2.0
13°0'S
13°0'S
uain Huamanguilla
Villa Virgen
2.1 - 4.0
San Miguel
4.1 - 8.0 Anco
Pacaycasa
Quinua > 8.0
Vilcabamba
0 15 30
District boundaries km
acucho
Major roadAcos Vinchos Geographic coordinates WGS84
River Chilcas
Village center 74°0'W 73°30'W
San Juan Bautista
Source: Government of Peru - National monitoring system supported by UNODC

The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or aceptance by the United Nations
202
2.1.1.2 Coca cultivation in Apurimac-Ene
The region is situated in the central part of the country extending over 12,000 sq km in the valleys
of the rivers Apurimac and Ene, among the departments of Ayacucho, Cusco and Junín. The relief
is uneven, and coca cultivation takes place at altitudes ranging between 550 and 2,000 meters
above sea level.
Coca cultivation has long been established in Apurimac-Ene, predominantly on the steep slopes
areas where the only other crops that can be grown are coffee and a few leguminous. To a lesser
extent coca is also grown in areas of lower slopes, sharing the land with annual crops like maize,
yucca, beans, sesame and permanent crops like cacao and fruit trees.
Apurimac-Ene is the second largest coca growing region of Peru, and with 15,530 ha in 2005, it
represented 32% of the national total. This represented an increase of 6% compared to 2004. The
increase was distributed over the valley, and it was not possible to identify a particular region
where an increase took place. The main centers of coca cultivation continued to be around the
villages of Santa Rosa, Palmapampa, Llochegua, Monterrico, Catarata and Alto Pichari.
Recently planted coca fields with high density of Recently planted coca fields on small terraces
plants/ha, Palmapampa, March 2006 Santa Rosa, March 2006
Table 4: Distribution of coca cultivation in Apurimac-Ene,2001 – 2005 (ha)

% change
% of 2005
Region 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2004 -
total
2005
Apurimac 12,600 13,283 13,777 13,382 14,125 6% 91%
Ene 0 887 923 1,319 1,405 7% 9%
Rounded total 12,600 14,170 14,300 14,700 15,500 5% 100%
Figure 5. Distribution of coca cultivation in Apurimac-Ene,2001 – 2005 (ha)

16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
hectare
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Apurimac Ene
203
Coca cultivation in Apurimac-Ene is notoriously more sophisticated than in other valleys,

characterized by a high density of the coca plants (up to 100,000 plants/ha) combined with an
intense use of fertilizers and pesticides. New plants are readily available from existing seedbeds,
either to be planted on new fields or to increase the plant density of old fields. There were also
report of farmers being advised by experts to improve their coca yields. For these reasons, it is in
Apurimac-Ene that the highest coca yields are obtained. Reports of annual yield above 4,000 kg/ha
are more and more often frequent.
According to the population statistics of INEI, in 1994 there were 93,800 inhabitants (18,500
families) in Apurimac-Ene. Since then, the population has naturally increased, but it is also likely
that it counts now with new migrants from the poorest areas of the Andean region who arrived in
Apurimac-Ene, attracted by the demand for labour in the coca fields. A large majority of the
population in Apurimac-Ene benefits directly or indirectly from coca cultivation.
In 2005, no forced eradication was implemented in the region, mainly due to the strong opposition
from the farmers organizations. The social tensions surrounding the issue of coca cultivation were
noticeable for the past three years and impeded the work of various organizations working in
alternative development projects. Since 1995, UNODC has been implementing Alternative
Development projects to improve coffee and palm trees production, benefiting about 1,100 persons.
The same social tensions also prevented the implementation of voluntary eradication programme
(4.4 ha voluntarily eradicated in 2005). There were however regular operations of the anti-narcotics
police to destroy coca maceration pits and clandestine laboratories.
Coca fields, Santa Rosa, March 2006
204
Coca seed beds and recently planted fields, Progreso, March 2006
Coca seed beds, Sivia, October 2005
205
Snapshot of the video over Apurimac
Snapshot of the video over Apurimac
206
Map 5: Verification overflight with GeoVideo, Apurimac
74°0'W 73°30'W
Masamari
Peru
An
a
Quempiri
pa
ti
Apurimac
Ene
Ene
12°0'S
12°0'S
Pangoa
JUNIN
em piri
Qu
Rio Tambo
Valle
o Esmeralda
ir
Yav
ENE
Ma
nt aro
Canayre
Villa
Virgen
AP
UR
IM
AC
Pichari
Chuimacota Llochegua
ari
h
12°30'S
12°30'S
Pic
Echarate
on
Sivia
Sivia
Ac
Pichari
CUSCO
i ri
imb
Qu
e
Pien
San Francisco Quimbiri

Quimbiri
AYACUCHO
Apurimac
Santillana Sta. Rosa
AP
UR
Ayna
IM
osa
AC
.R
Palmapampa
Sta
Santa Rosa
Huanta
Monterrico
Cultivation density Tambo

(ha/km2) a
mb
ba San Antonio
0.1 - 1.0 un
c hu
Ch
1.1 - 2.0
13°0'S
13°0'S
uain Huamanguilla
Villa Virgen
2.1 - 4.0
San Miguel
4.1 - 8.0 Anco
Pacaycasa
Quinua > 8.0
Vilcabamba
Overflight with geovideo

0 15 30
Department boundaries km
acucho District boundaries
Acos Vinchos Geographic coordinates WGS84
River Chilcas
San Juan Bautista

207
Map 6: Coca cultivation density in La Convención y Lares, 2005
72°30'W
Peru
La Convencion
Yavero and Lares
12°30'S
12°30'S
Ya
v
ero
Quellouno
Lares
Uru
Palma Real ba mba Yanati
Quellouno le
Quebrada
Honda
Ya
n ati
le
La Convención
ota
n
lca
Vi
Echarate
les
Yanatile
l
rsa
mba
Ve
Ocoba
Quillabamba
Santa Ana Kquellccaybamba
Vil
ca
not
Ocobamba
a
Maranura
Maranura
13°0'S
13°0'S
Huayopata
CUSCO
amba
Vilcab Huayopata Luc
uma
Cultivation density
2
(ha/km )
0.1 - 1.0
Vilcanota
1.1 - 2.0
2.1 - 4.0
SANTA TERESA Machupicchu
4.1 - 8.0 Urubamba
Ollantaytambo
> 8.0
0 15 30
Geographic coordinates WGS 84 Y
Major road
Maras
River
Village Center 72°30'W

208
2.1.1.3 Coca cultivation in La Convencion y Lares
The region is situated in the province of La Convencion in the department of Cusco. The natural
vegetation is made of subtropical forests. Due to intense deforestation, the primary forest is
nowadays only found in the higher parts of the region. Coca is mostly cultivated between 800 and
2,000 meter above sea, in the valleys of the rivers Urubamba and Yanatile.
In 2005, coca cultivation reached 12,503 ha, representing 26% of the national total, which ranked
the region third in terms of coca cultivation, behind Alto Huallaga and Apurimac. Compared to 2004
there was a slight decrease of 2% in coca cultivation. This small difference was mainly attributed to
the farmers’ practice of cutting their coca fields after three or four year of continuous production.
Coca fields on steep slopes (typical of La Convention) Sprouting coca fields (after pruning)
Echarate, March 2006 Huayanay, February 2005
Table 5: Distribution of coca cultivation in La Convencion y Lares, 2001 – 2005 (ha)

% change % of 2005
Region 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2004 – regional
2005 total
La Convención 8,455 6,086 5,476 5,339 5,481 3% 44%
Lares 5,525 6,084 6,864 7,361 7,022 -5% 56%
Rounded total 13,980 12,170 12,340 12,700 12,500 -2% 100%
Figure 6. Distribution of coca cultivation in La Convencion y Lares, 2001 – 2005 (ha)
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
hectare
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
La convencion Lares
209
Historically, the region has been considered as the coca cultivation centre for the traditional use of
coca leaves. In 1978, the state company ENACO registered 12,685 coca farmers for the cultivation
of 10,670 ha of coca bush. It was estimated at that time that the coca leaf production amounted to
7,400 metric tons per year, of which 3,764 metric tons (or 51%) were destined to ENACO, the rest
being smuggled outside the control of ENACO. Since then, the diversion of coca leaf intensified
due to the better price offered for coca leaf outside ENACO’s market. In particular, in the past few
years, it was noted that farmers improved their coca leaf yields by increasing the coca plant density
and the use of fertilizers and pesticide.
However, coca leaf production from the region is supposed to be mainly oriented towards
traditional uses like chewing, and not towards narco-trafficking. There was no report of eradication
nor destruction of maceration pits or clandestine laboratories.
In 2005, a regional decree authorized coca cultivation, thereby recognizing the region as a
traditional center of coca cultivation. The decree gave to the coca plant the status of Regional
Natural, Biological and Cultural Heritage of Cusco, as well as botanical resource integrated to the
culture and cosmovision of the Andean world and to the medicinal customs and traditions. It
recognized the region as traditional coca producing area and legalized coca cultivation in the
valleys of La Convencion, i.e. the valleys of Yanatile in the province of Calca and Qosñipata de Iño
in the province of Paucartambo, all in the department of Cusco. However, the decree was
invalidated by the Constitutional Court.
Old coca fields replanted with young plants, Vilcanota, November 2005
210
Coca fields associated with papaya trees, Sambaray, February 2005
Coca seed beds under shadow, Vilcanota February 2005
211
Map 7: Coca cultivation density in Inambari-Tembopata – San Gaban, 2005

y
70°30'W 70°0'W 69°30'W 69°0'W
12°30'S
Peru Laberinto
San Gaban and

Inambari - Tambotapa
I
AR
MB
INA
13°0'S
13°0'S
Inambari
Masuco MADRE DE DIOS
Araza Loro
Mayo
Chaspa
San Gaban
Yah
CUSCO u a rm
ayo
San Gaban TA
M BO
PA
TA
13°30'S
13°30'S
Coasa
aban
San Gaban IN
A MB
G
AR
San
Ayapata San Juan del Oro

Limbani
Ollachea
Ituata
INA
MB
AR
I
PUNO
Isilluma Az
at a
14°0'S
14°0'S
Alto Inambari San Ignacio La
nz
Macusani Inambari a
Masiapo Putinapunco
Usicayos Phara San
Ajoyani d ia
San Juan
Tambopata
ri ua
del Oro
mba
TA
Huari H
PA
a
Pablob
BO
Sandia
M
Patambuco
TA
Crucero Yanahuaya
Antauta
Cultivation density Potoni

2
(ha/km )
Quiaca
14°30'S
14°30'S
0.1 - 1.0 Sina

San Anton Cuyocuyo
1.1 - 2.0
2.1 - 4.0
4.1 - 8.0
> 8.0 Muñani
Bolivia
ORURILLO San Jose Ananea
International boundaries Putina
Department
Asillo boundaries
0 20 40
Major road Geographic coordinates WGS 84
River Azangaro
Quilcapunco
I 70°30'W Village
Tirapata center
70°0'W 69°30'W 69°0'W

212
2.1.1.4 Coca cultivation in Inambari-Tambopata
The rivers Inambari and Tambopata constitute the two main valleys for coca cultivation in the
province of Macusani in Puno department. According to the National System of Land Classification,
only 1% of the land would be suitable for agricultural activities while 99% of the land is on steep
slopes considered protected areas because of their vulnerability to erosion. Coca cultivation mainly
takes place on these steep slopes, between 800 and 1,800 meter above sea.
In 2005, coca cultivation was estimated at 2,250 ha, representing 5% of the national total. This
corresponded to a slight increase compared to the level of coca cultivation in 2004 estimated at
2,000 ha. In this region, coca cultivation is concentrated in the small valley of the river Inambari.
Table 6: Distribution of coca cultivation in Inambari-Tambopata, 2001 – 2005 (ha)

% Change % of 2005
Region 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2004 – regional
2005 total
Inambari 1,903 1,761 1,441 1,913 1,997 17% 87%
Tambopata 617 669 819 87 253 -12% 11%
Rounded total 2,520 2,430 2,260 2,000 2,300 15% 100%
In the 80’s, this area was considered as a traditional coca growing region. ENACO in 1988
registered 1,778 coca farmers for a declared area of coca cultivation of 783 ha. In the 90’s, the
production increased and was apparently more and more oriented towards narco-trafficking.
Recently, there were reports of production and marketing of cocaine paste. There were also
reports of illegal smuggling of inputs necessary for the production of cocaine paste or
hydrochloride, like kerosene, sulfuric acid and chalk among others.
During the field verification process, it was noted that in this region coca cultivation was often
interspersed or associated with other crops or bushes, which makes the detection of coca
cultivation more difficult. It was also noticeable that farmers tended to improve the management of
their coca fields to increase their yields, in particular an increase in plant density and use of
fertilizers.
In general, coca farmers living in this region do not depend exclusively from coca cultivation, but
also have other crops like coffees, or have developed activities in neighboring areas. It is rare to
find farmers who only cultivate coca bush.
In 2005, there was no report of eradication or auto-eradication in the valley. It should be noted that
access to this valley is increasingly difficult and risky because of the coca production destined for
narco-trafficking.
213
2.1.1.5 Coca cultivation in San Gaban
San Gaban region is presented on the same map as Inambari-Tambopata region. The valley of the
San Gaban river is part of the larger watershed of the Inambari river. It is situated in the north-
western part of the department of Puno bordering Bolivia. The relief is uneven and covered by high
altitude tropical forest. Coca cultivation mostly takes place between 400 and 1,200 meter above
sea level, on the high slope areas situated in the middle and low parts of the San Gaban valley, up
to its connection with the Inambari river. The area includes by the localities of Juliaca, Puerto
Maldonado and Iñapari at the border with Brazil.
The analysis of the SPOT5 image acquired in July 2005 over that area, showed that there were
292 ha of coca cultivation in this region. This corresponded to a decrease of 90% compared to the
2,700 ha registered in 2004, and only 0.6% of the national total. This spectacular decrease
followed intense eradication efforts by CORAH, that reported the eradication of 1,900 ha of coca
cultivation between October and December 2005.
The decrease in coca cultivation and its replacement by grasses and shrubs, can be noted in the
following snapshots of satellite images taken in 2004 and 2005.
214
2.1.1.6 Coca cultivation in Marañon, Putumayo, Huallaga Central and Bajo Huallaga
There were marginal levels of coca cultivation in the higher areas of the Marañon valley, situated in
the northern part of the Andean region, as well as in the Putumayo region close to the border with
Colombia in the north-eastern part of the country. Coca cultivation was estimated at only 350 ha for
these two regions.
In Marañon, in 1978, ENACO registered 900 coca farmers in the areas of Huayobamba and Balzas,
for a total of about 300 ha.
The Putumayo region is situated along the Putumayo river that makes the border with Colombia.
Although close to the important coca cultivation of Putumayo on the Colombian side of the river,
coca cultivation on the Peruvian side was considered very low in 2005. Coca cultivation was
estimated at about 100 ha in 2005.
For the past three years, various eradication campaigns have been conducted in the regions of
Huallaga Central and Bajo Huallaga. In 2005, only about 150 ha of coca cultivation were detected
on the satellite images.
215
Map 8: Coca cultivation density in Aguaytia and Palcazu-Pichis-Pichitea, 2005
75°30'W 75°0'W
Peru
A
TI
AY
U
AG
o
ndr
Aguaytia and
ja
UCAYALI
Ale
Palcazu-Pichis-Pachitea
San
Aguaytia
Von Humbolth
Honoria
San Alejandro
Padre Abad
Irazola
9°0'S
9°0'S
Huipoca
Tornavista
Boqueron Aguaytia
Puerto Inca
Daniel Alomias
Robles
9°30'S
9°30'S
HUANUCO
Yanayacu
Yuyapichis Yuyapichis
Codo del Pozuzo Pachitea

EA
PACHIT
Po
zu
zo
Santa Isab Sta. Isabel

el
Cultivation density
(ha/km 2 ) Palcazu Ciudad
Constitucion
PALCAZU
0.1 - 1.0
1.1 - 2.0 PICHIS PASCO
2.1 - 4.0
4.1 - 8.0
Pichis
10°0'S
10°0'S
> 8.0
District boundaries
0 15 30
Major road km
River Geographic coordinates WGS84

216
2.1.1.7 Coca cultivation in Aguaytia
Aguaytia is a valley situated in Aguaytia province in the department of Ucayali. The region is made
flat alluvial land and hills where coca cultivation takes place between 300 and 600 meters above
sea level.
Coca cultivation increased from 500 ha in 2004 to 917 ha in 2005, representing a 74% increase.
During the verification overflight, many new coca fields and recently prepared fields were noted.
This would mean that coca cultivation might continue to increase in 2006. However, coca
cultivation in Aguaytia only represented 2% of the national total.
Table 7: Coca cultivation in Aguaytia region(ha)

Change
% of 2005
Region 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2004 –
total
2005
Aguaytía 1,051 1,070 510 500 917 417 2%
Most of the coca cultivation was concentrated around the locality of Huipoca, and small patches of
coca cultivation could also be found along the Shambillo river. Coca fields were relatively less
dense and productive then in other regions. It could be found mixed with other crops and under
trees canopy. In these cases, the yield was probably even lower then on pure coca fields. There
were little reports on the use of agrochemicals in the coca fields in this region.
Coca fields in production and others Coca fields (note the spot where coca leaves
recently planted are being dried)
Huipoca, March 2006 Huipoca, March 2006
Although coca cultivation from Aguaytia was destined for the cocaine market, coca cultivation did
not represent any longer the basis of the agricultural economy of the region. Most of the crops
were banana, pineapple, cotton, and recently palm oil plantation supported by UNODC. The palm
oil plantation of 2000 ha benefited to 400 persons, most of them former coca growers.
There were a few operations of voluntary eradication conducted in the area of Campo Verde (451
ha) and in Aguaytia (1,001 ha). In 2005, DIRANDRO also reported the seizure of 393 kg of cocaine
paste and 500 g of cocaine hydrochloride.
217
2.1.1.8 Coca cultivation in Palcazu – Pichis - Pachitea
The valleys of the rivers Palcazu, Pichis and Pachitea are situated in the province of Oxapampa in
the department of Pasco, and the region is often referred to as ‘Selva Central’, the country central
forest. The landscape is predominantly hilly, alternating with flat areas. Coca cultivation is found
between 300 and 500 meters above sea level.
In 2005, coca cultivation was estimated at about 211 ha, representing only 0.4% of the national
total, and a decrease of 17% compared to the 300 ha found in 2004. As there was no eradication
in the region in 2005, the decrease was attributed to the limitation of the satellite images to detect
coca cultivation below tree canopy.
Table 8: Distribution of coca cultivation in Palcazu-Pichis-Pachitea, 2001 – 2005 (ha)

Change % of 2005
Region 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
2004 – 2005 total
Palcazu 100 150 102 161 151 -6% 76%
Pichis 100 98 73 96 43 -55% 22%
Pachitea 150 102 75 43 17 -60% 9%
Rounded total 350 350 250 300 200 -33% 100%
The presence of coca cultivation in this region has been attested since 1986. In the early 1990s,
coca cultivation in this region reached up to 12,000 ha for a production of coca leaves oriented
towards cocaine production. The prices fall of the mid-nineties caused the end of coca cultivation in
the region. In 2004, coca cultivation often took place below tree canopy to avoid detection, which
resulted in very low coca leaf yield.
In 2000, UNODC launched an alternative development project mainly oriented towards the genetic
improvement of cattle, and the training of native communities in the extraction of latex from Hevea
trees.
During the verification overflight in the north-western part of the region (between San Matias, and
the rivers Santa Isabel and Yanayacu in the district of Yuyapichis), a considerable amount of new
coca fields were spotted, along with coca seedbeds and newly prepared fields.
Coca fields under shadow,Santa Isable, March 2006
218
Recently planted coca fields, Santa Isabel, March 2006
Coca seed beds and recently planted coca fields, Santa Isabel, March 2006
Recently planted coca fields, Santa Isabel, March 2006
219
Snapshot of the video over Aguaytia
Snapshot of the video over Aguaytia
Snapshot of the video over Pichis-Pacazu-Pachitea
220
Map 9: Verification overflight with GeoVideo, Aguaytia, Palcazu – Pichis – Pachitea
75°30'W 75°0'W
Peru
A
TI
AY
U
AG
o
ndr
Aguaytia and
ja
UCAYALI
Ale
Palcazu-Pichis-Pachitea
San
Aguaytia
Von Humbolth
Honoria
San Alejandro
Padre Abad
Irazola
9°0'S
9°0'S
Huipoca
Tornavista
Boqueron Aguaytia
Puerto Inca
Daniel Alomias
Robles
9°30'S
9°30'S
HUANUCO
Yanayacu
Yuyapichis Yuyapichis
Codo del Pozuzo Pachitea

EA
PACHIT
Po
zu
zo
Santa Isab Sta. Isabel

el
Cultivation density
(ha/km 2 ) Palcazu Ciudad
Constitucion
PALCAZU
0.1 - 1.0
1.1 - 2.0 PICHIS PASCO
2.1 - 4.0
4.1 - 8.0
Pichis
10°0'S
10°0'S
> 8.0
Overflight with geovideo
Department boundaries 0 15 30
River Geographic coordinates WGS84

221
2.1.2 PRODUCTION COCA LEAF AND DERIVATIVES
UNODC continuously endeavours to refine its estimation of coca leaf and cocaine production. In
2004, a coca leaf yield survey was initiated. As coca leaves are harvested several times during the
year, it is important that such yield survey spanned over a year or more. However, the field
activities planned in 2005 and that should have validated the results obtained in 2004 could not be
implemented because of the insecurity for staff prevailing in the main coca growing regions. The
results obtained in 2004 thus continued to be used, but further work on the topic is needed to refine
and complement these results in particular the conversion rate from coca leaf to cocaine.
In 2005, assuming an average sun-dried coca leaf yield of 2,200 kg/ha, the total sun-dried coca
leaf production in Peru was estimated at 106,000 metric tons. Of this amount, a study 1 of the
National Institute of Statistics and Computer Science (INEI) estimated that about 9,000 metric tons
corresponded to the annual demand for coca leaves for traditional, commercial or industrial uses.
The rest being destined for narco-trafficking.
Assuming a cocaine yield per hectare of 4.1 kg/ha – similar to the average yield obtained in 20042 -,
the total rounded cocaine production in Peru was estimated at 180 metric tons. Thus, cocaine
production in Peru decreased by 5% compared to 190 metric tons produced in 2004.
Figure 7. Peru potential cocaine production 1995 – 2005 (in metric tons)
500
450
400
350
300
Metric ton
250
200
150
100
50
-
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Metric tons 460 435 325 240 175 141 150 165 155 190 180
In 2005, potential cocaine production in Peru accounted for 20% of the global potential cocaine
production of 910 metric tons. This was a much lower percentage than ten years ago, when
potential cocaine production in Peru represented about 49% of the global potential cocaine
production.
1
“Encuesta Nacional sobre consume tradicional de hoja de coca en los hogares”, INEI – DEVIDA, November 2004
2
After deduction of 4,100 ha of coca cultivation corresponding to the production of 9,000 mt of coca leaf for traditional
demand
222
Table 9: Potential cocaine production in the Andean region 1995 - 2005 (in mt)
%
% of
change
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2005
2004-
total
2005
Bolivia 240 215 200 150 70 43 60 60 79 107 90 -16% 10%
Peru 460 435 325 240 175 141 150 165 155 190 180 -5% 20%
Colombia 230 300 350 435 680 695 617 580 550 640 640 0% 70%
Total 930 950 875 825 925 879 827 805 784 937 910 -3% 100%
Figure 8. Potential cocaine production in the Andean region 1995 - 2005 (in mt)

and 2005 is based on new field research.
1,000
175 190
141 180
800
150
435 165
460 325 240 155
metric ton
600
680 640
400 640
350 695
230 300 435 617 550
580
200
240 215 200

150
79 107 90
70 43 60 60
0
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
223
2.2 PRICES OF COCA LEAF AND ITS DERIVATIVES
In Peru, the annual average price of coca leaf in 2005 (SOL 9.4/kg or US$ 2.9/kg) was very similar to the
annual average of 2004 that established at SOL 9.4 /kg (US$ 2.8/kg), illustrating the stability of the coca leaf
prices. Even though a decrease could be noted for the prices of coca leaf between September and
December, a decrease also noted for the cocaine paste prices between the same period, this trend might
have been seasonal, corresponding in a peak of harvest of coca leaf during the rainy season. In addition,
prices usually fell towards the end of the year, as farmers tend to harvest just before Christmas to cover their
expenses during the festive period. At the regional level, prices of coca leaf remained the highest in Monzon
region, where coca cultivation is widespread and the demand high.
Table 10: Regional prices of coca leaf in Peru, 2005

Region SOL/kg US$/kg
Alto Huallaga: Monzon 12.0 3.7
Alto Huallaga: South 10.4 3.2
Alto Huallaga: North 8.5 2.6
Apurimac 7.0 2.2
Inambari 9.8 2.9
Aguaytia 8.4 2.6
All regions 9.4 2.9
The detailed monthly prices per region for 2005 and 2004 are annexed.
Figure 9. Coca leaf, 2004-2005 monthly average prices, Peru (US$/kg)
In 2005, the potential farm-gate value of the sun-dried coca leaf production amounted to about
US$ 307 million, estimated from the sale of 106,000 metric tons of coca leaf at 2.9 US$/kg. This
represented about 0.4% of the 2004 GDP estimated at US$ 68.6 billion3.
The stability of the prices of coca leaf was reflected in the stability of the price of cocaine paste.
Prices of cocaine paste remained unchanged between 2004 and 2005 at US$640 /kg. Like for the
prices of coca leaf, prices of cocaine base have been decreasing between September and
December 2005, but this decrease might have only reflected a seasonal variation.
Prices for cocaine paste are usually highest in Monzon and Apurimac regions, the two main
centers of illicit cultivation which represented respectively 23% and 32% of the national coca
cultivation in 2005.
3
World Bank, latest available estimate as of May 2006
224
Table 11: Regional prices of cocaine paste, 2005

Region US$/kg
Alto Huallaga: Monzon 680
Alto Huallaga: South 640
Alto Huallaga: North 580
Apurimac 690
Aguaytia 680
All regions 640
Figure 10. Cocaine paste, 2004-2005 average prices for Alto Huallaga North, Monzon and
Apurimac (US$/kg)
750
700
650
600
US$/kg
550
500
450
400
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05
Alto Huallaga: North Alto Huallaga: Monzon Apurimac
Like the prices of coca leaf and cocaine paste, prices of cocaine remained virtually unchanged in
Peru between 2004 and 2005, at US$890 /kg. The annual average cocaine prices recorded in Peru
is much lower then the average prices in Colombia (US$ 1,860/kg) and Bolivia (US$ 1,800/kg).
The difference might be due to the fact that the price in Peru refers to the price in the producing
region, close to its processing, whereas prices in Colombia and Bolivia refer to whole sale prices in
the main cities.
Table 12: Regional prices of cocaine in Peru, 2005

Region US$/kg
Alto Huallaga: Monzon 970
Alto Huallaga: South 890
Alto Huallaga: North 830
Aguaytia 1,080
All regions 890
225
2.3 REPORTED ERADICATION
In 2005, the Peruvian government reported the eradication of 12,232 ha of coca fields, of which
8,966 ha eradicated by CORAH as part of its programme of forced eradication and 3,266 ha
eradicated by CADA as part of its programme of voluntary eradication. This corresponded to an
increase of 19% compared to the 10,257 ha of eradicated coca cultivation reported in 2004.
Figure 11. Coca cultivation and eradication of coca fields in Peru, 1995 - 2005
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
hectare
60,000
40,000
20,000
-
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Eradication 1,259 3,462 7,834 14,733 6,206 6,436 7,134 11,312 10,257 12,232
Coca cultivation 115,30 94,400 68,800 51,000 38,700 43,400 46,200 46,700 44,200 50,300 48,200
Eradication Coca cultivation
226
Map 10: Reported eradication of coca cultivation, Peru, 2005
80°W 75°W 70°W

0°
0°
Peru
Pu
tu
ma
COLOMBIA
y o
South America
ECUADOR
Putumayo
Tumbes Loreto
nas
azo
Am
5°S
5°S
Piura Amazonas
ga
alla
Hu
Lambayeque Cajamarca
Marañón
San Martin
BRAZIL
Ma
rañ
Uc
o
ay
n
ali
La Libertad
Hu
alla
ga
Alto Aguaytía
Huallaga
Ancash Huanuco
Palcazú - Pichis
PachiteaUcayali
10°S
10°S
s
Pasco ru
Pu
Pacific
Ocean
Junin
En
e
Ur
Lima
ub
La Convención
am
Madre de Dios
ba

Lima y Lares de Dio
s
Apurimac Madre
Ene
Huancavelica
Cusco San Gabán
Apu
r ima
c
Ayacucho Apurimac
Ica
Inambari
Puno
Tambopata
15°S
15°S
Total reported eradication

2005 (ha) BOLIVIA
Titicaca
Arequipa Lake
0 - 50
51 - 650
651 - 1200 Moquegua
1201 - 2000
Tacna
> 2000
0 150 300
km
Coca growing area 2005 Geographic coordinates WGS 84
CHILE
Department
80°W
boundaries 75°W 70°W

227
Between 2004 and 2005, according to the reported data of the Peruvian anti-narcotics police,
DIRANDRO, seizures of cocaine paste and cocaine hydrochloride decreased but destruction and
seizures of coca leaves increased. Seizures of cocaine hydrochloride decreased from 7,3 mt in
2004 to 2,1 mt kg in 2005, while seizures and destruction of coca leaves increased from 916 mt to
1,525 mt.
Table 13: Drug seized in Peru, 2003 – 2005 (kg or otherwise specified)
Item seized 2003 2004 2005
Destruction and seizure of coca leaf 1,328,347 916,024 1,525,739
Cocaine paste 4,366 6,330 3,199
Cocaine hydrochloride 3,574 7,303 2,119
Source: DIRANDRO
228

Andean Full Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Andean Full Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

COCA CULTIVATION IN THE ANDEAN REGION

A survey of Bolivia, Colombia and Peru

Government of Bolivia Government of Colombia Government of Peru

This document has not been formally edited.

Part 1. Regional Overview .......................................................................................................1

Part 2. Environmental effects of illicit drug cultivation and processing ......................... 17

Deforestation and illicit crops............................................................................................... 19

Part 3. Bolivia Coca Cultivation Survey ...............................................................................49

Part 4. Colombia Coca Cultivation Survey.........................................................................103

Part 5. Peru Coca Cultivation Survey .................................................................................183

x Richer countries – the consumers of cocaine – need to invest more in alternative

Antonio Maria Costa

FACT SHEET - ANDEAN COCA SURVEYS FOR 2005

Peru 50,300 ha 48,200 ha -4%

Bolivia 27,700 ha 25,400 ha -8%

Farm-gate value of coca cultivation US$ 1,330 million

Peru 0.4% 0.4%

Bolivia 3.0% 2.1%

Global cocaine production 937 mt 910 mt -3%

Peru 190 mt 180 mt -5%

Bolivia 107 mt 90 mt -16%

Average wholesale price of cocaine

Peru (in producing regions) US$ 890/kg US$ 890/kg 0%

Bolivia (in main cities) US$ 1,800/kg US$ 1,800/kg 0%

Europe US$ 45,830/kg US$ 47,690/kg +2%

United States US$ 22,070/kg n.a.

Peru 10,399 ha 12,232 ha +18%

Bolivia 8,437 ha 6,073 ha -28%

Peru 7,3 mt 2,2 mt

Bolivia 0.5 mt 1.3 mt

Map 1: Coca cultivation density in the Andean Region, 2005

80°W 70°W ARGENTINA 60°W

Map 2: Coca cultivation by region in Bolivia, 2001 – 2005

Coca cultivation (ha)

Source: Government of Bolivia - National monitoring system supported by UNODC

Map 3: Coca cultivation by region in Colombia, 2001 – 2005

Caquetá Amazonia BRAZIL

Coca cultivation (ha)

Department boundaries 75°W 70°W

Source: Government of Colombia - National monitoring system supported by UNODC

Map 4: Coca cultivation by region in Peru, 2001 – 2005

80°W 75°W 70°W

Coca cultivation (ha)

Source: Government of Peru - National of monitoring system supported by UNODC

Coca cultivation in the Andean region

Figure 1: Coca cultivation in the Andean region (ha), 1994 - 2005

Bolivia Colombia Peru

Table 1: Coca cultivation in the Andean Region (ha), 1994-2005

Figure 2: Coca cultivation in Colombia (ha), 1995-2005

Figure 3: Coca cultivation in Peru (ha), 1995-2005

Sources: US Department of State National Monitoring System supported by UNODC

Figure 4: Coca cultivation in Bolivia (ha), 1994-2005

Figure 5: Eradication of coca bush in Bolivia, Colombia and Peru (ha)

Production of coca leaf and derivatives

Figure 6: Global cocaine production (metric tons), 1990-20052

Cocaine seizures and seized coca processing laboratories

Figure 7: Global cocaine seizures by region, 2004

S E IZUR E S of C OC AINE * (Kg and %) – B Y R E GION - 2004

- 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000

South America 264,087 ( 45%)

North America 195,968 (33%)

West & Central Europe 78,699 (13%)

Central America 29,762 (5%)

Caribbean 15,107 (3% )