To Contents
National Drug Intelligence Center
National Drug Threat Assessment 2009
December 2008
Figure 1. Vectors in the Transit Zone--CCDB-Documented Cocaine Flow Departing South America, January-December 2007
Map showing cocaine flow through the Mexico-Central America drug transportation vectors.
The map shows 69% of cocaine flows through the Eastern Pacific vector; 21% of cocaine flows through the Western Caribbean vector; 0% of cocaine flows through the Central America vector; 1% of cocaine flows through the Jamaica vector; 9% of cocaine flows through the Haiti/Dominican Republic vector; less than 1% of cocaine flows through the Puerto Rico/U.S. Virgin Islands vector; less than 1% of cocaine flows through the ABC/Latin America vector; and less than 1% of cocaine flows straight to the U.S. from production areas.
Percentages based on all confirmed, substantiated, and
higher-confidence suspect events in the Consolidated Counterdrug Database
(CCDB). Arrows represent general movement corridors.
Source: Interagency Assessment of Cocaine Movement.
Return to Figure 1.
Figure 2. Southwest Border Cocaine Seizures At or Between POEs, by Quarter, in Kilograms, 2004-2008*
Graph showing cocaine seizures, in kilograms, along the Southwest Border from the 1st quarter of 2004 through the 2nd quarter of 2008, broken down by state and quarter.
In the 1st quarter of 2004, 2,172.06 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 317.03 kilograms were seized in California, 506.85 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 81.35 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 3,077.27 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 2nd quarter of 2004, 1,928.28 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 427.92 kilograms were seized in California, 710.32 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 3,066.52 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 3rd quarter of 2004, 1,001.24 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 591.79 kilograms were seized in California, 651.38 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0.01 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 2,244.42 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 4th quarter of 2004, 1,296.91 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 573.69 kilograms were seized in California, 607.96 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 2,478.56 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 1st quarter of 2005, 1,368.56 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 388.43 kilograms were seized in California, 449.32 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 2,206.31 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 2nd quarter of 2005, 1,321.07 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 620.81 kilograms were seized in California, 539.91 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 2,481.8 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 3rd quarter of 2005, 1,797.22 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 624.62 kilograms were seized in California, 410.34 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 2,832.19 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 4th quarter of 2005, 1,987.25 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 724.79 kilograms were seized in California, 651.21 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 3,363.25 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 1st quarter of 2006, 1,651.8 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 758.21 kilograms were seized in California, 641.91 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 3,051.93 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 2nd quarter of 2006, 1,640.47 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 1,050.69 kilograms were seized in California, 474.54 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 3,165.71 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 3rd quarter of 2006, 1,552.36 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 1,052.01 kilograms were seized in California, 477.86 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 6.78 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 3,089.03 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 4th quarter of 2006, 1,402.93 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 901.96 kilograms were seized in California, 332.98 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 9.53 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 2,647.41 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 1st quarter of 2007, 1,855.01 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 862.76 kilograms were seized in California, 222.9 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 2,940.65 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 2nd quarter of 2007, 828.09 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 980.21 kilograms were seized in California, 471.87 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 2,280.16 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 3rd quarter of 2007, 1,187.82 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 955.7 kilograms were seized in California, 383.51 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 2,527.03 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 4th quarter of 2007, 1,128.81 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 733.09 kilograms were seized in California, 362.96 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 2,224.86 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 1st quarter of 2008, 997.9 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 1,252.91 kilograms were seized in California, 467.83 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 2,718.64 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
In the 2nd quarter of 2008, 556.37 kilograms of cocaine were seized in Texas, 933.42 kilograms were seized in California, 295.6 kilograms were seized in Arizona, and 0 kilograms were seized in New Mexico for a total of 1,785.4 kilograms of cocaine seized along the Southwest Border.
Source: National Seizure System.
* Data run September 15, 2008.
Return to Figure 2.
Figure 3. Cocaine Price and Purity, April 2005-June 2008
Graph showing all cocaine purchase prices per quarter (normalized) based on domestic STRIDE data from April 2005 through June 2008.
In the period of April-June 2005, the mean price per pure gram of cocaine was
$92.55, and the purity was 66.07%.
In the period of July-September 2005, the mean price per pure gram of cocaine
was $105.13, and the purity was 65.52%.
In the period of October-December 2005, the mean price per pure gram of cocaine
was $93.94, and the purity was 67.34%.
In the period of January-March 2006, the mean price per pure gram of cocaine was
$100.01, and the purity was 68.21%.
In the period of April-June 2006, the mean price per pure gram of cocaine was
$92.22, and the purity was 68.63%.
In the period of July-September 2006, the mean price per pure gram of cocaine
was $92.28, and the purity was 67.70%.
In the period of October-December 2006, the mean price per pure gram of cocaine
was $87.57, and the purity was 69.56%.
In the period of January-March 2007, the mean price per pure gram of cocaine was
$97.01, and the purity was 66.99%.
In the period of April-June 2007, the mean price per pure gram of cocaine was
$117.72, and the purity was 58.79%.
In the period of July-September 2007, the mean price per pure gram of cocaine
was $135.57, and the purity was 56.47%.
In the period of October-December 2007, the mean price per pure gram of cocaine
was $116.16, and the purity was 60.66%.
In the period of January-March 2008, the mean price per pure gram of cocaine was
$124.95, and the purity was 56.64%.
In the period of April-June 2008, the mean price per pure gram of cocaine was
$123.25, and the purity was 56.51%.
The graph covers the period of April 2005 through June 2008
There were 54,428 records of seizures/purchases
- 1,861 foreign purchases/seizures (including U.S. territories)
- 35,095 domestic seizures
• = 17,472 purchases
- 387 having zero purity
- 190 having zero price
- 10 form/lab/agent error
• = 16,885 domestic drug purchases/data points
• 733.1 kg total purchase weight
• 473.5 kg total purchase pure weight (100%)
* From January 2007 through June 2008, the price per pure gram of cocaine
increased 27.0%, from $97.01 to $123.25, while the purity decreased 15.6%, from
67% to 57%.
** STRIDE is a database of drug exhibits sent to DEA laboratories from the DEA,
FBI, CBP, ICE, USCG, and Washington MPD. STRIDE is not a representative sample
of drugs available in the United States, but reflects all evidence submitted to
DEA laboratories for analysis. STRIDE data are not collected to reflect national
market trends. Nonetheless, STRIDE data reflect the best information currently
available on changes in methamphetamine price and purity.
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration.
Return to Figure 3.
Figure 4. Federal Cocaine Seizure Totals, in Kilograms, First Quarter 2003 to Second Quarter 2008
Graph showing federal cocaine seizure totals, in kilograms from the first quarter of 2003 to the second quarter of 2008, broken down by quarter.
In the first quarter of 2003, 14,291 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the second quarter of 2003, 12,137 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the third quarter of 2003, 14,899 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the fourth quarter of 2003, 13,561 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the first quarter of 2004, 20,518 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the second quarter of 2004, 11,304 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the third quarter of 2004, 11,282 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the fourth quarter of 2004, 16,272 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the first quarter of 2005, 12,263 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the second quarter of 2005, 13,145 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the third quarter of 2005, 15,110 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the fourth quarter of 2005, 12,924 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the first quarter of 2006, 13,129 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the second quarter of 2006, 12,723 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the third quarter of 2006, 14,676 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the fourth quarter of 2006, 14,604 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the first quarter of 2007, 15,322 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the second quarter of 2007, 11,000 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the third quarter of 2007, 12,777 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the fourth quarter of 2007, 10,783 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the first quarter of 2008, 10,565 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
In the second quarter of 2008, 9,074 kilograms of cocaine were seized.
Source: Federal-Wide Drug Seizure System.
Return to Figure 4.
Figure 5. Percent of National Positive Cocaine Test Results, 2005 to Second Quarter 2008
Graph showing the national percentage of drug tests that tested positive for cocaine from the first quarter of 2005 to the second quarter of 2008, broken down by quarter.
In the first quarter of 2005, 0.74% of drug tests tested positive for cocaine.
In the second quarter of 2005, 0.73% of drug tests tested positive for cocaine.
In the third quarter of 2005, 0.72% of drug tests tested positive for cocaine.
In the fourth quarter of 2005, 0.74% of drug tests tested positive for cocaine.
In the first quarter of 2006, 0.74% of drug tests tested positive for cocaine.
In the second quarter of 2006, 0.71% of drug tests tested positive for cocaine.
In the third quarter of 2006, 0.73% of drug tests tested positive for cocaine.
In the fourth quarter of 2006, 0.70% of drug tests tested positive for cocaine.
In the first quarter of 2007, 0.66% of drug tests tested positive for cocaine.
In the second quarter of 2007, 0.56% of drug tests tested positive for cocaine.
In the third quarter of 2007, 0.56% of drug tests tested positive for cocaine.
In the fourth quarter of 2007, 0.54% of drug tests tested positive for cocaine.
In the first quarter of 2008, 0.49% of drug tests tested positive for cocaine.
In the second quarter of 2008, 0.46% of drug tests tested positive for cocaine.
Source: Quest Diagnostics.
Return to Figure 5.
Figure 6. Commercial Pseudoephedrine Imports Into Mexico, in Metric Tons, 2004-2008
Chart showing commercial pseudoephedrine imports into Mexico, in metric tons, for the years 2004-2008, broken down by year.
In 2004, 226.5 metric tons of pseudoephedrine were commercially imported into Mexico.
In 2005, 98.5 metric tons of pseudoephedrine were commercially imported into Mexico.
In 2006, 43.4 metric tons of pseudoephedrine were commercially imported into Mexico.
In 2007, 40.0 metric tons of pseudoephedrine were commercially imported into Mexico.
In 2008*, 0 metric tons of pseudoephedrine were planned for commercial import into Mexico.
* Government of Mexico target for commercial pseudoephedrine imports for
2008.
Source: United Nations.
Return to Figure 6.
Figure 7. Methamphetamine Seized Along the Southwest Border, in Kilograms, 2004-2008*
Chart showing annual seizure totals for methamphetamine seized along the Southwest Border, in kilograms, for the years 2004-2008.
In 2004, 2,358.92 kilograms of methamphetamine were seized along the Southwest Border.
In 2005, 2,903.41 kilograms of methamphetamine were seized along the Southwest Border.
In 2006, 2,808.92 kilograms of methamphetamine were seized along the Southwest Border.
In 2007, 1,707.55 kilograms of methamphetamine were seized along the Southwest Border.
As of November 13, 2008, 2,006.21 kilograms of methamphetamine were seized along the Southwest Border.
Source: National Seizure System.
* Data run November 13, 2008.
Return to Figure 7.
Figure 8. Methamphetamine Price and Purity, April 2005-June 2008
Graph showing all methamphetamine purchase prices per quarter (normalized) based on domestic STRIDE data from April 2005 through June 2008.
In the period of April-June 2005, the mean price per pure gram of
methamphetamine was
$111.58, and the purity was 70.53%.
In the period of July-September 2005, the mean price per pure gram of
methamphetamine
was $101.54, and the purity was 71.06%.
In the period of October-December 2005, the mean price per pure gram of
methamphetamine
was $106.81, and the purity was 62.25%.
In the period of January-March 2006, the mean price per pure gram of
methamphetamine was
$224.01, and the purity was 37.23%.
In the period of April-June 2006, the mean price per pure gram of
methamphetamine was
$248.05, and the purity was 37.71%.
In the period of July-September 2006, the mean price per pure gram of
methamphetamine
was $178.63, and the purity was 48.79%.
In the period of October-December 2006, the mean price per pure gram of
methamphetamine
was $132.23, and the purity was 57.17%.
In the period of January-March 2007, the mean price per pure gram of
methamphetamine was
$149.78, and the purity was 56.92%.
In the period of April-June 2007, the mean price per pure gram of
methamphetamine was
$217.60, and the purity was 42.39%.
In the period of July-September 2007, the mean price per pure gram of
methamphetamine
was $269.37, and the purity was 38.77%.
In the period of October-December 2007, the mean price per pure gram of
methamphetamine
was $284.12, and the purity was 40.98%.
In the period of January-March 2008, the mean price per pure gram of
methamphetamine was
$235.44, and the purity was 45.90%.
In the period of April-June 2008, the mean price per pure gram of
methamphetamine was
$237.99, and the purity was 51.71%.
The graph covers the period of April 2005 through June 2008
There were 21,855 records of seizures/purchases
- 441 foreign purchases/seizures (including U.S. territories)
- 15,299 domestic seizures
• = 6,115 purchases
- 106 having zero purity
- 110 having zero price
- 6 form/lab/agent error
• = 5,893 domestic drug purchases/data points
• 405.2 kg total purchase weight
• 217.7 kg total purchase pure weight (100%)
* From January 2007 through June 2008, the price per pure gram of
Methamphetamine increased 58.9%, from $149.78 to $237.99, while the purity
decreased 9.2%, from 57% to 52%.
** STRIDE is a database of drug exhibits sent to DEA laboratories from the DEA,
FBI, CBP, ICE, USCG, and Washington MPD. STRIDE is not a representative sample
of drugs available in the United States, but reflects all evidence submitted to
DEA laboratories for analysis. STRIDE data are not collected to reflect national
market trends. Nonetheless, STRIDE data reflect the best information currently
available on changes in methamphetamine price and purity.
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration.
Return to Figure 8.
Figure 9. Percent of Positive Methamphetamine Test Results
Graph showing the national percentage of drug tests that tested positive for methamphetamine from the first quarter of 2005 to the first quarter of 2008, broken down by quarter.
In the first quarter of 2005, 0.30% of drug tests tested positive for methamphetamine.
In the second quarter of 2005, 0.29% of drug tests tested positive for methamphetamine.
In the third quarter of 2005, 0.27% of drug tests tested positive for methamphetamine.
In the fourth quarter of 2005, 0.26% of drug tests tested positive for methamphetamine.
In the first quarter of 2006, 0.20% of drug tests tested positive for methamphetamine.
In the second quarter of 2006, 0.17% of drug tests tested positive for methamphetamine.
In the third quarter of 2006, 0.16% of drug tests tested positive for methamphetamine.
In the fourth quarter of 2006, 0.19% of drug tests tested positive for methamphetamine.
In the first quarter of 2007, 0.18% of drug tests tested positive for methamphetamine.
In the second quarter of 2007, 0.14% of drug tests tested positive for methamphetamine.
In the third quarter of 2007, 0.12% of drug tests tested positive for methamphetamine.
In the fourth quarter of 2007, 0.11% of drug tests tested positive for methamphetamine.
In the first quarter of 2008, 0.11% of drug tests tested positive for methamphetamine.
Source: Quest Diagnostics.
Return to Figure 9.
Figure 10. Methamphetamine Seized in the United States, in Kilograms, 2005-2008*
Chart showing annual seizure totals for methamphetamine seized in the United States, in kilograms, for the years 2005-2008.
In 2005, 6,015.04 kilograms of methamphetamine were seized in the United States.
In 2006, 7,106.68 kilograms of methamphetamine were seized in the United States.
In 2007, 4,689.55 kilograms of methamphetamine were seized in the United States.
As of November 13, 2008, 6,335.66 kilograms of methamphetamine were seized in the United States.
Source: National Seizure System.
* Data run November 13, 2008.
Return to Figure 10.
Figure 11. Methamphetamine Laboratory Seizures in the United States, 2000-2008*
Chart showing annual seizure totals for methamphetamine laboratories seized in the United States, in kilograms, for the years 2000-2008.
In 2000, 7,025 methamphetamine laboratories were seized in the United States.
In 2001, 8,544 methamphetamine laboratories were seized in the United States.
In 2002, 9,285 methamphetamine laboratories were seized in the United States.
In 2003, 10,249 methamphetamine laboratories were seized in the United States.
In 2004, 10,015 methamphetamine laboratories were seized in the United States.
In 2005, 6,010 methamphetamine laboratories were seized in the United States.
In 2006, 3,943 methamphetamine laboratories were seized in the United States.
In 2007, 2,973 methamphetamine laboratories were seized in the United States.
As of November 13, 2008, 2,584 methamphetamine laboratories were seized in the United States.
Source: National Seizure System.
* Data run November 13, 2008.
Return to Figure 11.
Figure 12. Average Percentage of THC in Samples of Seized Marijuana, 1985-2007
Graph showing the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana for the years 1985-2007, broken down by year.
In 1985, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was
3.48%.
In 1986, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 2.80%.
In 1987, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 3.20%.
In 1988, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 3.70%.
In 1989, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 3.78%.
In 1990, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 3.82%.
In 1991, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 3.26%.
In 1992, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 3.16%.
In 1993, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 3.65%.
In 1994, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 3.75%.
In 1995, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 3.96%.
In 1996, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 4.50%.
In 1997, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 5.01%.
In 1998, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 4.91%.
In 1999, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 4.59%.
In 2000, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 5.34%.
In 2001, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 6.10%.
In 2002, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 7.20%.
In 2003, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 7.14%.
In 2004, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 8.13%.
In 2005, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 8.02%.
In 2006, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 8.77%.
In 2007, the average percentage of THC in samples of seized marijuana was 9.64%.
Source: University of Mississippi Potency Monitoring Project.
Return to Figure 12.
Figure 13. Indoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated Nationally, 2003-2007
Graph showing the number of indoor cannabis plants eradicated nationally, for the years 2003-2007, broken down by year.
In 2003, 223,183 indoor cannabis plants were eradicated nationally.
In 2004, 203,896 indoor cannabis plants were eradicated nationally.
In 2005, 270,935 indoor cannabis plants were eradicated nationally.
In 2006, 400,829 indoor cannabis plants were eradicated nationally.
In 2007, 434,728 indoor cannabis plants were eradicated nationally.
Source: Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program.
Return to Figure 13.
Figure 14. Outdoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated Nationally, 2004-2007
Graph showing the number of outdoor cannabis plants eradicated nationally, for the years 2004-2007, broken down by year.
In 2004, 2,996,225 outdoor cannabis plants were eradicated nationally;
986,546 of these plants were eradicated from public lands.
In 2005, 3,938,151 outdoor cannabis plants were eradicated nationally; 1,376,451
of these plants were eradicated from public lands.
In 2006, 4,830,766 outdoor cannabis plants were eradicated nationally; 1,993,375
of these plants were eradicated from public lands.
In 2007, 6,599,599 outdoor cannabis plants were eradicated nationally; 2,639,244
of these plants were eradicated from public lands.
Source: Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program; U.S. Department of the Interior; U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
Return to Figure 14.
Figure 15. Southwest Border Marijuana Seizures, in Kilograms, 2003-2008
Graph showing Southwest Border marijuana seizures, in kilograms, for the years 2003-2008.
In 2003, 1,201,379 kilograms of marijuana were seized.
In 2004, 1,107,021 kilograms of marijuana were seized.
In 2005, 1,033,079 kilograms of marijuana were seized.
In 2006, 1,142,473 kilograms of marijuana were seized.
In 2007, 1,466,324 kilograms of marijuana were seized.
As of December 1, 2008*, 1,124,104 kilograms of marijuana
were seized.
Source: National Seizure System.
* Data run December 1, 2008.
Return to Figure 15.
Figure 16. Potential Heroin Production for Mexico and Colombia, in Metric Tons, 1999-2007*
Graph showing potential heroin production for Mexico and Colombia, in metric tons, for the years 1999-2007, broken down by country and year.
Potential heroin production for Mexico for 1999 was 8.8 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Mexico for 2000 was 4.5 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Mexico for 2001 was 10.7 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Mexico for 2002 was 6.8 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Mexico for 2003 was 11.9 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Mexico for 2004 was 8.6 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Mexico for 2005 was 8.0 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Mexico for 2006 was 12.7 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Mexico for 2007 was 18.0 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Colombia for 1999 was 8.7 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Colombia for 2000 was 8.7 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Colombia for 2001 was 11.4 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Colombia for 2002 was 8.5 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Colombia for 2003 was 7.8 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Colombia for 2004 was 3.8 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Colombia for 2005 was not reported.
Potential heroin production for Colombia for 2006 was 4.6 metric tons.
Potential heroin production for Colombia for 2007 was not reported.
Source: Crime and Narcotics Center.
* CNC did not report an estimate for Colombia for 2005 or
2007.
Return to Figure 16.
Figure 17. South American and Mexican Retail Heroin Purity, by Percentage, 2001-2006
Graph showing South American and Mexican retail heroin purity, by percentage, for the years 2001-2006, broken down by year.
In 2001, retail South American heroin had a purity of 49.7%. Retail Mexican heroin had a purity of 21.0%.
In 2002, retail South American heroin had a purity of 46.0%. Retail Mexican heroin had a purity of 27.3%.
In 2003, retail South American heroin had a purity of 41.8%. Retail Mexican heroin had a purity of 26.3%.
In 2004, retail South American heroin had a purity of 32.5%. Retail Mexican heroin had a purity of 27.9%.
In 2005, retail South American heroin had a purity of 37.3%. Retail Mexican heroin had a purity of 32.5%.
In 2006, retail South American heroin had a purity of 36.1%. Retail Mexican heroin had a purity of 30.0%.
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Heroin Domestic Monitor Program.
Return to Figure 17.
Figure 18. Heroin Seizures At Commercial Air Ports of Entry and At Southwest Border, in Kilograms, 2003-2008*
Graph showing heroin seizures at commercial air Ports of Entry and at Southwest Border, in kilograms, for the years 2003-2008, broken down by year and seizure location.
In 2003, 1,217.92 kilograms of heroin were seized at commercial air Ports of Entry, and 310.34 kilograms of heroin were seized at the Southwest Border.
In 2004, 909.09 kilograms of heroin were seized at commercial air Ports of Entry, and 386.38 kilograms of heroin were seized at the Southwest Border.
In 2005, 741.98 kilograms of heroin were seized at commercial air Ports of Entry, and 228.60 kilograms of heroin were seized at the Southwest Border.
In 2006, 532.84 kilograms of heroin were seized at commercial air Ports of Entry, and 529.04 kilograms of heroin were seized at the Southwest Border.
In 2007, 422.54 kilograms of heroin were seized at commercial air Ports of Entry, and 360.15 kilograms of heroin were seized at the Southwest Border.
As of September 15, 2008, 248.03 kilograms of heroin were seized at commercial air Ports of Entry, and 342.66 kilograms of heroin were seized at the Southwest Border.
Source: National Seizure System.
* Data run September 15, 2008.
Return to Figure 18.
Figure 19. Average Heroin Weight per Southwest Border Seizure Event, in Kilograms, 2003-2008*
Graph showing average weight of seized heroin per Southwest Border seizure event, in kilograms, for the years 2003-2008.
In 2003, the average weight of heroin seized per Southwest Border seizure event was 2.0 kilograms.
In 2004, the average weight of heroin seized per Southwest Border seizure event was 2.1 kilograms.
In 2005, the average weight of heroin seized per Southwest Border seizure event was 2.1 kilograms.
In 2006, the average weight of heroin seized per Southwest Border seizure event was 2.2 kilograms.
In 2007, the average weight of heroin seized per Southwest Border seizure event was 1.8 kilograms.
As of September 15, 2008, the average weight of heroin seized per Southwest Border seizure event was 2.4 kilograms.
Source: National Seizure System.
*
Data run September 15, 2008.
Return to Figure 19.
Figure 20. Percentage of Seized Heroin Weight, by Source Area, 2002-2006
Graph showing the percentage of seized heroin weight, by source area, for the years 2002-2006.
In 2002, 80% of seized heroin was of South American origin, 9% was of Mexican origin, 10% was of Southwest Asian origin, and 1% was of Southeast Asian origin.
In 2003, 88% of seized heroin was of South American origin, 3% was of Mexican origin, 8% was of Southwest Asian origin, and 1% was of Southeast Asian origin.
In 2004, 69% of seized heroin was of South American origin, 14% was of Mexican origin, 14% was of Southwest Asian origin, and 3% was of Southeast Asian origin.
In 2005, 69% of seized heroin was of South American origin, 14% was of Mexican origin, 13% was of Southwest Asian origin, and 4% was of Southeast Asian origin.
In 2006, 76% of seized heroin was of South American origin, 20% was of Mexican origin, 4% was of Southwest Asian origin, and 0% was of Southeast Asian origin.
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Heroin Signature Program.
Return to Figure 20.
Figure 21. Price per Milligram of Pure Heroin, by Source Area, 2002-2006*
Graph showing the price per milligram of pure heroin, by source area, for the years 2002-2006.
In 2002, the price of pure South American heroin was $0.72 per milligram; pure Mexican heroin was $0.70 per milligram; pure Southwest Asian heroin was $0.75 per milligram; and pure Southeast Asian heroin was $0.61 per milligram.
In 2003, the price of pure South American heroin was $0.77 per milligram; pure Mexican heroin was $0.75 per milligram; pure Southwest Asian heroin was $0.95 per milligram; and pure Southeast Asian heroin was $0.44 per milligram.
In 2004, the price of pure South American heroin was $1.00 per milligram; pure Mexican heroin was $0.97 per milligram; pure Southwest Asian heroin was $0.75 per milligram; and pure Southeast Asian heroin was $0.66 per milligram.
In 2005, the price of pure South American heroin was $0.81 per milligram; pure Mexican heroin was $0.66 per milligram; pure Southwest Asian heroin was $1.26 per milligram; and pure Southeast Asian heroin was $1.45 per milligram.
In 2006, the price of pure South American heroin was $1.04 per milligram; pure Mexican heroin was $0.77 per milligram; pure Southwest Asian heroin was $1.24 per milligram; and no heroin samples were identified as Southeast Asian.
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Heroin Domestic Monitor Program.
* No heroin samples were identified as Southeast Asian by
HDMP in 2006.
Return to Figure 21.
Figure 22. Rogue Pharmacies Operating on the Internet, 2004-2008
Graph showing numbers of rogue pharmacies operating on the Internet for the years 2004-2008, broken down by type.
In 2004, there were 154 sites directly selling prescription drugs (anchor sites) and 338 sites advertising prescription drugs (portal sites) for a total of 492 sites.
In 2005, there were 154 sites directly selling prescription drugs (anchor sites) and 242 sites advertising prescription drugs (portal sites) for a total of 396 sites.
In 2006, there were 174 sites directly selling prescription drugs (anchor sites) and 168 sites advertising prescription drugs (portal sites) for a total of 342 sites.
In 2007, there were 187 sites directly selling prescription drugs (anchor sites) and 394 sites advertising prescription drugs (portal sites) for a total of 581 sites.
In 2008, there were 159 sites directly selling prescription drugs (anchor sites) and 206 sites advertising prescription drugs (portal sites) for a total of 365 sites.
Source: National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University.
Return to Figure 22.
Figure 23. Prescription Requirements of Internet Pharmacy Anchor Sites, 2004-2008
Graph showing the prescription requirements of Internet pharmacy anchor sites for the years 2004-2008.
In 2004, 144 anchor sites did not require a prescription; 63 anchor sites expressly stated no prescription needed; 5 anchor sites did not mention prescriptions; and 76 anchor sites offered online consultation.
In 2005, 147 anchor sites did not require a prescription; 53 anchor sites expressly stated no prescription needed; 10 anchor sites did not mention prescriptions; and 84 anchor sites offered online consultation.
In 2006, 155 anchor sites did not require a prescription; 49 anchor sites expressly stated no prescription needed; 16 anchor sites did not mention prescriptions; and 90 anchor sites offered online consultation.
In 2007, 157 anchor sites did not require a prescription; 52 anchor sites expressly stated no prescription needed; 22 anchor sites did not mention prescriptions; and 83 anchor sites offered online consultation.
In 2008, 135 anchor sites did not require a prescription; 57 anchor sites expressly stated no prescription needed; 17 anchor sites did not mention prescriptions; and 61 anchor sites offered online consultation.
Source: National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University.
Return to Figure 23.
Figure 24. MDMA Laboratory Incidents in Canada, 2003-2007
Chart showing MDMA laboratory incidents in Canada for the years 2003-2007.
In 2003, there were 10 MDMA laboratory incidents in Canada.
In 2004, there were 18 MDMA laboratory incidents in Canada.
In 2005, there were 17 MDMA laboratory incidents in Canada.
In 2006, there were 16 MDMA laboratory incidents in Canada.
In 2007, there were 18 MDMA laboratory incidents in Canada.
Source: Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
* All 18 incidents in 2007 occurred at superlabs.
Return to Figure 24.
Figure 25. MDMA Seizure Totals in the United States, 2003-2008,* in Dosage Units
Chart showing MDMA seizure totals in the United States for the years 2003-2008.
In 2003, 5,301,848 dosage units of MDMA were seized.
In 2004, 1,963,535 dosage units of MDMA were seized.
In 2005, 10,385,133 dosage units of MDMA were seized.
In 2006, 13,390,416 dosage units of MDMA were seized.
In 2007, 18,574,986 dosage units of MDMA were seized.
As of September 15, 2008, 9,767,708 dosage units of MDMA were seized.
Source: National Seizure System.
*
Data run September 15, 2008.
Return to Figure 25.
Map A1. Nine OCDETF Regions.
U.S. map showing the nine OCDETF regions.
The Pacific OCDETF region consists of Alaska, Hawaii, American
Samoa, Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Nevada, and
Northern and Central California.
The West Central OCDETF region consists of Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, North
Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, Missouri, and Southern
Illinois.
The Southwest OCDETF region consists of Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and
Southern California.
The Great Lakes OCDETF region consists of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northern Illinois,
Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, and Kentucky.
The Southeast OCDETF region consists of Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama,
Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina.
The New England OCDETF region consists of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont,
Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island.
The New York/New Jersey OCDETF region consists of New York and New Jersey.
The Mid-Atlantic OCDETF region consists of Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, West
Virginia, Virginia, and the District of Columbia.
The Florida/Caribbean OCDETF region consists of Florida, Puerto Rico, and the U.S.
Virgin Islands.
Return to Map A1.
Map A2. NDTS 2008 greatest drug threat by region, as reported by state and local agencies.
U.S. map with graphs superimposed showing greatest drug threat by region, as reported by state and local agencies on the NDTS 2008.
In the Pacific region, 5.8% of state and local agencies reported cocaine as the greatest drug threat; 1.1% reported heroin as the greatest drug threat; 87.3% reported methamphetamine as the greatest drug threat; 4.0% reported marijuana as the greatest drug threat; and 1.9% reported pharmaceuticals as the greatest drug threat.
In the West Central region, 25.7% of state and local agencies reported cocaine as the greatest drug threat, 2.8% reported heroin as the greatest drug threat; 60.2% reported methamphetamine as the greatest drug threat; 6.0% reported marijuana as the greatest drug threat; and 5.0% reported pharmaceuticals as the greatest drug threat.
In the Southwest region, 26.1% of state and local agencies reported cocaine as the greatest drug threat, 2.0% reported heroin as the greatest drug threat; 57.5% reported methamphetamine as the greatest drug threat; 8.7% reported marijuana as the greatest drug threat; and 5.4% reported pharmaceuticals as the greatest drug threat.
In the Southeast region, 58.7% of state and local agencies reported cocaine as the greatest drug threat, 1.3% reported heroin as the greatest drug threat; 26.9% reported methamphetamine as the greatest drug threat; 3.6% reported marijuana as the greatest drug threat; and 9.1% reported pharmaceuticals as the greatest drug threat.
In the Great Lakes region, 45.1% of state and local agencies reported cocaine as the greatest drug threat, 11.9% reported heroin as the greatest drug threat; 17.1% reported methamphetamine as the greatest drug threat; 15.1% reported marijuana as the greatest drug threat; and 9.4% reported pharmaceuticals as the greatest drug threat.
In the Mid-Atlantic region, 48.7% of state and local agencies reported cocaine as the greatest drug threat, 24.5% reported heroin as the greatest drug threat; 1.0% reported methamphetamine as the greatest drug threat; 14.6% reported marijuana as the greatest drug threat; and 10.9% reported pharmaceuticals as the greatest drug threat.
In the Florida/Caribbean region, 68.2% of state and local agencies reported cocaine as the greatest drug threat, 0.0% reported heroin as the greatest drug threat; 13.2% reported methamphetamine as the greatest drug threat; 8.4% reported marijuana as the greatest drug threat; and 10.1% reported pharmaceuticals as the greatest drug threat.
In the New York/New Jersey region, 42.9% of state and local agencies reported cocaine as the greatest drug threat, 22.1% reported heroin as the greatest drug threat; 0.0% reported methamphetamine as the greatest drug threat; 27.2% reported marijuana as the greatest drug threat; and 7.0% reported pharmaceuticals as the greatest drug threat.
In the New England region, 39.6% of state and local agencies reported cocaine as the greatest drug threat, 30.0% reported heroin as the greatest drug threat; 0.2% reported methamphetamine as the greatest drug threat; 15.2% reported marijuana as the greatest drug threat; and 14.5% reported pharmaceuticals as the greatest drug threat.
Return to Map A2.
Map A3. NDTS 2008 greatest drug threat, as reported by state and local agencies.
U.S. map with graph superimposed showing greatest drug threat as reported by state and local agencies on the NDTS 2008.
40.9% of state and local agencies reported cocaine as the greatest drug
threat.
9.8% of state and local agencies reported heroin as the greatest drug threat.
29.4% of state and local agencies reported methamphetamine as the greatest drug
threat.
11.3% of state and local agencies reported marijuana as the greatest drug
threat.
8.1% of state and local agencies reported pharmaceuticals as the greatest drug
threat.
Return to Map A3.
Map A4. U.S. cities with decreased cocaine availability, first quarter 2008 versus 2006 levels, by OCDETF region, as reported by federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies.
U.S. map showing cities reporting decreased cocaine availability in the first quarter of 2008 versus 2006 levels, by OCDETF region.
In the West Central region, Kansas City and St. Louis, Missouri reported decreased cocaine availability.
In the Great Lakes region, Chicago, Illinois and Minneapolis, Minnesota reported decreased cocaine availability.
In the Mid-Atlantic region, Baltimore, Maryland; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Washington, D.C. reported decreased cocaine availability.
In the New York/New Jersey region, New York, New York reported decreased cocaine availability.
In the New England region, Boston, Massachusetts reported decreased cocaine availability.
In the Southeast region, Atlanta, Georgia; Memphis and Nashville, Tennessee; and Charlotte, North Carolina reported decreased cocaine availability.
In the Florida/Caribbean region, Tampa, Florida reported decreased cocaine availability.
No cities in the Pacific or Southwest regions reported decreased cocaine availability.
Source: Multiple federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies.
Return to Map A4.
Map A5. U.S. cities reporting the presence of Mexican DTOs, January 1, 2006, through September 30, 2008.
U.S. map showing cities reporting the presence of Mexican DTOs, from January 1, 2006 through September 30, 2008.
Cities reporting the presence of Mexican DTOs were Anchorage, Alaska; Albertville, Birmingham, Decatur, Dothan, Huntsville, Mobile, Montgomery, Alabama; Fayetteville, Fort Smith, and Little Rock, Arkansas; Douglas, Glendale, Naco, Nogales, Peoria, Phoenix, Sasabe, Sierra Vista, Tucson, and Yuma, Arizona; Alameda, Bakersfield, Calexico, Chula Vista, El Centro, Elk Grove, Escondido, Fresno, Garden Grove, Goshen, Hacienda Heights, Hayward, Los Angeles, Oakland, Oceanside, Otay Mesa, Oxnard, Perris, Porterville, Riverside, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, Santa Ana, Stockton, Temecula, Tulare, and Westminster, California; Aurora, Colorado Springs, Denver, Fort Collins, Greely, Olathe, and Pueblo, Colorado; Hartford, Connecticut; Washington, D.C.; Wilmington, Delaware; Fort Lauderdale, Jacksonville, Lakeland, Miami, Orlando, and Tampa, Florida; Atlanta, Georgia; Hilo, Honolulu, and Kailua Kona, Hawaii; Des Moines, Iowa; Boise, Caldwell, Idaho Falls, Nampa, Pocatello, and Twin Falls, Idaho; Chicago, East St. Louis, and Joliet, Illinois; Fort Wayne, Gary, and Indianapolis, Indiana; Dodge City, Kansas City, Liberal, and Wichita, Kansas; Lexington and Louisville, Kentucky; Baton Rouge, Lafayette, New Orleans, and Shreveport, Louisiana; Boston and Fitchburg, Massachusetts; Baltimore, Frederick, and Greenbelt, Maryland; Portland, Maine; Detroit and Kalamazoo Michigan; Minneapolis, St. Cloud, and St. Paul, Minnesota; Kansas City and St. Louis, Missouri; Hattiesburg and Jackson, Mississippi; Billings and Helena, Montana; Asheville, Burlington, Charlotte, Durham, Greensboro, Hendersonville, Raleigh, Wilmington, Wilson, and Winston-Salem, North Carolina; Bismarck, North Dakota; Omaha, Nebraska; Greenville, New Hampshire; Atlantic City, Camden, and Newark, New Jersey; Albuquerque, Columbus, Deming, and Las Cruces, New Mexico; Carson City, Las Vegas, and Reno, Nevada; Albany, Buffalo, and New York, New York; Akron, Canton, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, Hamilton, Toledo, and Youngstown, Ohio; Oklahoma City, Ponca City, and Tulsa, Oklahoma; Eugene, Klamath Falls, Medford, Portland, Roseburg, and Salem, Oregon; Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Providence, Rhode Island; Charleston, Columbia, Florence, Greenville, and Myrtle Beach, South Carolina; Sioux Falls, South Dakota; Knoxville, Memphis, and Nashville, Tennessee; Alpine, Amarillo, Austin, Beaumont, Big Springs, Brownsville, Corpus Christi, Dallas, Del Rio, Eagle Pass, Edinburg, El Paso, Fabens, Fort Hancock, Fort Stockton, Fort Worth, Hidalgo, Houston, Laredo, Lubbock, McAllen, Midland, Midway, Mission, Odessa, Pecos, Presidio, Rio Grande City, Roma, San Antonio, Tyler, Waco, Texas; Ogden, Provo, Salt Lake City, and St. George, Utah; Arlington, Galax, and Richmond, Virginia; Auburn, Bellingham, Centralia, Ephrata, Everett, Federal Way, Ferndale, Goldendale, Milton, Monroe, Olympia, Port Angeles, Renton, Richland, Seattle, Selah, Shelton, Spokane, Sultan, Sunnyside, Tacoma, Toppenish, Vancouver, and Yakima, Washington; Milwaukee and Sheboygan, Wisconsin; and Casper, Cheyenne, and Rock Springs, Wyoming.
Source: Federal, state, and local law enforcement reporting January 1, 2006 through September 30, 2008.
Return to Map A5.
Map A6. U.S. cities reporting the presence of Asian DTOs, January 1, 2006, through April 8, 2008.
U.S. map showing cities reporting the presence of Asian DTOs, from January 1, 2006 through April 8, 2008.
Cities reporting the presence of Asian DTOs were Huntsville and Mobile, Alabama; Anchorage, Alaska; Little Rock and Fort Smith, Arkansas; Chula Vista, Elk Grove, Escondido, Fresno, Garden Grove, Hacienda Heights, Los Angeles, Oakland, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, Stockton, and Westminster, California; Aurora, Colorado Springs, and Denver, Colorado; Hartford, Connecticut; Jacksonville, Miami, Orlando, and Tampa, Florida; Atlanta, Georgia; Hilo, Honolulu, and Kona, Hawaii; Boise, Idaho; Chicago, Illinois; Sioux City, Iowa; Kansas City and Wichita, Kansas; Baton Rouge, Lake Charles, Monroe, New Orleans, and Shreveport, Louisiana; Baltimore, Maryland; Boston, Dorchester, and Medford, Massachusetts; Detroit, Michigan; Minneapolis and St. Cloud, Minnesota; Hattiesburg, Mississippi; St. Louis, Missouri; Helena, Montana; Charlotte and Durham, North Carolina; Las Vegas, Nevada; Atlantic City, Camden, Edison, and Newark, New Jersey; Buffalo and New York, New York; Cleveland and Youngstown, Ohio; Oklahoma City and Tulsa, Oklahoma; Medford, Portland, Roseburg, and Salem, Oregon; Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Reading, and Scranton, Pennsylvania; Memphis and Nashville, Tennessee; Amarillo, Dallas, Fort Worth, and Houston, Texas; Salt Lake City, Utah; Arlington and Richmond, Virginia; Ferndale, Olympia, Port Orchard, Renton , Seattle, Spokane, Tacoma, and Tukwila, Washington; and Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Source: Federal, state, and local law enforcement reporting January 1, 2006 through April 8, 2008.
Return to Map A6.
Map A7. U.S. cities reporting the presence of Colombian, Cuban, and Dominican DTOs; La Cosa Nostra; and Italian organized crime, January 1, 2006, through April 8, 2008.
U.S. map showing cities reporting the presence of Colombian, Cuban, and Dominican DTOs; La Cosa Nostra; and Italian organized crime, from January 1, 2006 through April 8, 2008.
Cities reporting the presence of Colombian DTOs were Birmingham, Alabama; Phoenix, Arizona; Los Angeles and San Diego, California; Denver, Colorado; Hartford, Connecticut; Washington, D.C.; Fort Lauderdale, Jacksonville, Key West, Miami, Orlando, Palm Beach, and Tampa, Florida; Atlanta, Georgia; Chicago, Illinois; New Orleans, Louisiana; Baltimore, Maryland; Detroit, Michigan; Newark, New Jersey; New York, New York; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Brownsville, Dallas, El Paso, Houston, and McAllen, Texas; Salt Lake City, Utah; Norfolk and Richmond, Virginia; Spokane and Tacoma, Washington; and Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Cities reporting the presence of Cuban DTOs were Phoenix, Arizona; Bridgeport, and Hartford, Connecticut; Washington, D.C.; Cape Coral, Fort Lauderdale, Fort Myers, Gainesville, Jacksonville, Key West, Leight Acres, Miami, and Tampa, Florida; Atlanta, Georgia; Baton Rouge and Lake Charles, Louisiana; Baltimore, Maryland; Boston, Massachusetts; Albert Lea and Minneapolis, Minnesota; Belton, Kansas City, and St. Joseph, Missouri; Carson City and Las Vegas, Nevada; Newark Patterson, and Union City, New Jersey; Albuquerque, New Mexico; New York, New York; Greensboro, North Carolina; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Providence, Rhode Island.
Cities reporting the presence of Dominican DTOs were Los Angeles, California; Springfield, Colorado; Bridgeport, Hartford, and New Britain, Connecticut; Washington, D.C.; Wilmington, Delaware; Fort Lauderdale, Jacksonville, Miami, Orlando, and West Palm Beach, Florida; Atlanta, Georgia; Chicago, Illinois; Baltimore, Maryland; Boston, Dorchester, Lawrence, Lowell, Lynn, New Bedford, and Springfield, Massachusetts; Atlantic City, Camden, Jersey City, Newark, Passaic, Patterson, Perth Amboy, and Woodbridge, New Jersey; Albany, New York, Rochester, and Schenectady, New York; Charlotte and Wilmington, North Carolina; Cincinnati, Cleveland, Dayton, Toledo, and Youngstown, Ohio; Allentown, Easton, Philadelphia, and Scranton, Pennsylvania; Providence, Rhode Island; Watertown, Tennessee; Dallas, El Paso, and Houston, Texas; Richmond, Virginia; and Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Cities reporting the presence of Italian organized crime were Little Rock Arkansas; Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco, California; Hartford, Connecticut; Denver, Colorado; Fort Lauderdale and Miami, Florida; Atlanta, Georgia; Chicago, Illinois; Boston, Massachusetts; Detroit, Michigan; Kansas City, Missouri; Las Vegas, Nevada; Atlantic City, Camden, and Newark, New Jersey; Buffalo and New York, New York; Greensboro, North Carolina; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Seattle, Washington.
Cities reporting the presence of La Cosa Nostra were Los Angeles and San Diego, California; Hartford, Connecticut; Miami and Tampa, Florida; Atlanta, Georgia; Chicago, Illinois; Boston, Massachusetts; Detroit, Michigan; Kansas City and St. Louis, Missouri; Las Vegas, Nevada; Atlantic City, Camden, and Newark, New Jersey; Buffalo, New York, and Rochester, New York; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Providence, Rhode Island.
Source: Federal, state, and local law enforcement reporting January 1, 2006 through April 8, 2008.
Return to Map A7.
End of page.