Vantara In a development that has sparked global attention, the Secretariat of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) has flagged major irregularities in wildlife imports carried out by the Greens Zoological Rescue & Rehabilitation Center (GZRRC) — popularly known as Vantara — and the Radha Krishna Temple Elephant Welfare Trust (RKTEWT) in Jamnagar, Gujarat. The facility, backed by Reliance Industries and managed by Anant Ambani, son of industrialist Mukesh Ambani, is now at the center of an international compliance review.
The findings, presented during the 79th meeting of the CITES Standing Committee (SC79), stem from a verification mission held in India in September 2025. The report scrutinized how Vantara acquired and imported thousands of endangered animals, many listed under Appendix I, which represents the world’s most threatened species.
CITES Secretariat Identifies Compliance Lapses
The CITES Secretariat acknowledged that Vantara and the associated elephant welfare trust maintain world-class facilities and veterinary care for the animals in their care. However, it warned that India’s procedures for approving these imports may breach key principles of the global wildlife trade treaty.
According to the Secretariat, India’s CITES Management Authority accepted documentation from exporting countries “on face value,” without adequate verification — even when the origin nations posed high risks of illegal trade. This leniency, it said, has potentially opened the door to illegal wildlife trafficking under the guise of conservation.
Thousands of Appendix I Animals Imported
One of the report’s most striking findings concerns the import of 2,132 Appendix I animals, including some of the world’s most endangered species — cheetahs, gorillas, chimpanzees, and orangutans. Such large-scale transfers are, by definition, supposed to occur only under “exceptional circumstances”, as per Article II of the CITES Convention.
The Secretariat stated that the sheer volume of Appendix I imports by Vantara appeared inconsistent with the Convention’s guiding principles, which prohibit routine or commercial-scale trade in highly endangered wildlife.
“Bred in Captivity” Classification Under Scrutiny
The CITES report highlighted that over 2,000 of these imports were marked under Source Code C — denoting “bred in captivity.” However, the Secretariat raised doubts over whether many of these animals genuinely met CITES’ strict captive-breeding criteria, which require them to be at least second-generation (F2) individuals, born and raised entirely in captivity.
Experts warned that if wild-caught animals are falsely labeled as captive-bred, it undermines the entire foundation of global conservation agreements. It also risks fueling illegal capture from the wild, incentivizing poachers and traffickers.
Imports from Non-Range and High-Risk States
Another serious concern raised by the Secretariat involves animals imported from countries that are neither natural habitats (range States) of the species nor recognized centers of captive breeding. These include the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, and the Syrian Arab Republic — none of which are known for legitimate breeding of African great apes or big cats.
In one example, a bonobo, an endangered species native only to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, was reportedly re-exported from the UAE with Iraq listed as its origin — an implausible claim that slipped through Indian authorities’ checks.
Conflicting Claims: Rescue or Purchase?
Vantara representatives and RKTEWT officials told investigators that the animals had not been bought, but were instead rescued, confiscated, or donated. However, documentation obtained from Czechia’s CITES Management Authority included invoices listing purchase prices and taxes, suggesting that financial transactions took place.
The Secretariat described this contradiction as “material to transparency and compliance,” underscoring the need for clear, verifiable records in cross-border wildlife movements.
Concerns About Forged Permits and Trafficking Attempts
The CITES verification mission also revealed attempts by traffickers to exploit Vantara’s large-scale acquisitions. Authorities received forged export permits for eight chimpanzees allegedly from Cameroon, a known hotspot for illegal primate trade.
While Indian authorities eventually revoked the import approvals, the Secretariat noted that this was done only after Vantara’s own internal team raised concerns, not through proactive government detection.
Permit Discrepancies: Snow Leopard Example
In another case, two snow leopards re-exported from Germany were issued permits under purpose code T (commercial use) by German authorities, indicating that they did not qualify as purely zoological transfers.
Despite this, the Indian Management Authority reclassified them under purpose code Z (zoological) based solely on a letter of donation from the importer, without confirming with German authorities. CITES deemed this a serious lapse in verification and due diligence.
CITES Recommends Immediate Halt to Appendix-I Imports
Given the multiple compliance breaches, the Secretariat has recommended that India suspend all further imports of Appendix I species until robust oversight mechanisms are implemented. The proposal calls for India to demonstrate proof of strengthened due diligence, including cross-verification with exporting and re-exporting nations.
The Secretariat specifically requested cooperation with countries such as Germany, Mexico, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iraq, Syria, and the UAE, to confirm that animals imported under captive-bred status meet the official definition of “bred in captivity” under Resolution Conf. 10.16 (Rev. CoP19).
India Urged to Strengthen Oversight and Coordination
CITES has urged the Indian government to upgrade its CITES Management Authority, ensure it is properly staffed and funded, and improve coordination with both the Scientific Authority and the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (WCCB).
The Secretariat also encouraged India to establish a risk-based due diligence framework that flags irregularities before permits are issued, focusing especially on species unlikely to be bred in captivity.
Also read: VANTARA SANCTUARY STORIES: A Transformative Wildlife Series Unveiling the Heart of Compassion
Implications for India’s Conservation Credibility
India, which has historically been a strong supporter of wildlife conservation and a party to CITES since 1976, faces potential reputational risks if the allegations are not addressed. The report cautioned that continuing with weak verification procedures could inadvertently make India a destination for illegally sourced animals disguised as captive-bred.
Environmental experts say this controversy could undermine India’s global leadership in biodiversity protection — especially at a time when the nation is promoting initiatives like Project Cheetah, and facilities like Vantara are positioned as models for ethical wildlife care.
What is Vantara?
Established under the umbrella of Reliance Industries, Vantara—which means “forest” or “haven”—was envisioned by Anant Ambani as a large-scale rescue and rehabilitation center for injured and abandoned wildlife. Spread across hundreds of acres in Jamnagar, Gujarat, the facility houses elephants, lions, tigers, reptiles, birds, and exotic mammals from across the world.
The center has been praised for its state-of-the-art medical facilities, spacious habitats, and animal welfare practices, attracting veterinarians and conservationists globally. However, the recent CITES findings have brought renewed scrutiny to how such large collections of endangered species were acquired and documented.
Also read: Vantara Zoo: A Paradise of Wildlife Conservation and Animal Care in India
Global Reactions and Next Steps
International conservation groups have welcomed CITES’ intervention, calling it a necessary step to ensure transparency. Some NGOs argue that private conservation projects like Vantara can play a critical role in saving endangered species — but only if they adhere to strict international guidelines and maintain full traceability of animal origins.
Reliance Industries and Vantara representatives have not issued an official response yet, but sources close to the project have reportedly stated that Vantara operates with the highest ethical standards and cooperates fully with both Indian and international authorities.
CITES Warning: Risk of Fueling Illegal Wildlife Trade
In its closing statement, the Secretariat cautioned that lax controls on wildlife imports could unintentionally stimulate illegal demand. It emphasized that any system which allows wild-caught animals to be laundered as captive-bred poses a serious threat to global conservation efforts.
“Without reinforced due diligence,” the Secretariat wrote, “India risks undermining CITES objectives and fueling the very trade the Convention seeks to prevent.”
Also read: Redwood National Park: The Ultimate Travel Guide to California’s Ancient Giants
The Road Ahead for India and Vantara
As India reviews its wildlife trade protocols, the Vantara case could become a defining moment for how private conservation initiatives are regulated. Strengthening transparency, enhancing international coordination, and ensuring genuine captive-breeding verification will be essential to maintain trust in India’s conservation commitments.
While the controversy may temporarily cast a shadow over Vantara’s mission, experts believe it could ultimately lead to tighter governance, greater accountability, and improved wildlife protection frameworks—not only for India, but as a model for global best practices.
