NGOs call for permanent moratorium on animal imports to Vantara

A group of 27 global conservation organisations have written to Vantara calling for a permanent halt on wild animal imports to the facility. The letter was written in response to Vantara’s own statement announcing a temporary moratorium on animal imports till June 2027.  Vantara is a private zoo and animal rescue centre owned by India’s Ambani family.

If Vantara seeks to establish itself as a leading institution, it should “adopt the most rigorous and precautionary criteria for wildlife transfers,” the conservation groups say. A one year moratorium “may signal to exporters that imports will resume thereafter. It risks creating further demand, leading to the stockpiling of animals by wildlife traders and traffickers in anticipation of its expiration.”

On August 19, Vantara announced it would pause all animal imports till its own internal due diligence systems were in place. A 2025 report by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) Secretariat had raised serious concerns about the origin and scale of wild animal imports approved by India, for transfer to Vantara. Many of these animals did not have a history of being captively bred, the CITES report found.

Vantara has said in a statement that it would shift its focus to in-situ conservation within range states, and set up a three-tiered mechanism to vet future animal acquisitions. Each import proposal will be passed through an internal Due Diligence Committee, an Advisory Board, and a Governing Council, chaired by former secretary general of the CITES, John E. Scanlon AO. “Vantara is choosing to hold itself to standards beyond what the law requires, in order to build trust and confidence with national authorities, the CITES Parties, Standing Committee and Secretariat, and the wider conservation community,” its said in its announcement.

However, conservation groups have called for more stringent independent oversight over the facility. “While we welcome the announcement of a future focus on in-country support, we are concerned that without strong safeguards in place, the prospect of funding for alleged rescue or conservation programmes might provide an incentive for the sourcing of animals from the wild, either from illegal sources or from commercial trade,” says the letter.

The letter was addressed to Vantara’s President of Regulatory Affairs, Amit Aggarwal, on September 22. Among its signatories are the Jane Goodall Institute Global, Pro Wildlife, the Pan African Sanctuary Alliance (PASA), and Born Free Foundation.

Questions over independence and transparency

Apart from Scanlon, Vantara has recruited several prominent conservationists, former officers of the Indian Forest Service, former CITES officials, and even a former Supreme Court judge to lead its due diligence efforts. The Due Diligence Committee is led by Jonathan Bardzo, a former CITES Secretariat official, and the Advisory Board includes Manilal Valliyate, former Chief Executive Officer of PETA India and Matti Kiupel, Professor of Pathology at the College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, among others.

While the internal due diligence system is welcome, “it is our understanding that panel members may be compensated by Vantara and are appointed and subject to dismissal by Vantara…Without full disclosure, this raises questions as to their independence and the potential for conflicts of interest,” says the letter. It adds that the mandates of these committees should be published and publicly available.

“Given that Vantara may possess substantially greater financial, legal, professional, and political resources than the organisations, researchers, or institutions that are scrutinising its activities, it is vitally important that its institutional arrangements are demonstrably and transparently robust and independent,” the letter adds.

The letter also presses for greater transparency on Vantara’s animal acquisitions. The facility was reported to have at least 47,633 animals as of September 2025. The last acquisition was made on June 5, 2026. Vantara should release a public inventory of its animals detailing where they were sourced from, the re-exporting facilities they travelled through, where they are currently housed, records of transfers to other facilities, deaths, “and means of disposal of deceased animals,” says the letter.

A Special Investigation Team set up by the Supreme Court last year cleared Vantara of any wrong-doing in its acquisition of animals. However, the CITES Secretariat later noted several lapses in the source codes identifying the transfers to the facility.

Among the animals in Vantara’s possession are species like the Tapanuli orangutan (Pongo tapanuliensis), not known to be captively bred anywhere in the world, the Spix’s macaw (Cyanopsitta spixii) a bird declared to be extinct in the wild, and snow leopards (Panthera uncia), among thousands of others.

According to the letter, many of the animals in Vantara’s possession “could not have feasibly been rescued,” and the facility should adopt stricter criteria for what constitutes a legitimate “rescue,” going forward the letter says. This should include ensuring that “no payments are made for the acquisition or transfer of animals, whether directly by Vantara or indirectly through donors.”

It also suggests that Vantara give priority to repatriating animals to range States for their rehabilitation and release, wherever possible. “This should only be done when genuine rehabilitation/release programmes are already established, or where sanctuaries have (or can attain, prior to transfer) the necessary capacities to ensure adequate welfare,” it says.

“Wildlife is part of a country’s natural heritage; retaining and caring for wildlife within its natural range not only supports conservation, but also preserves a sense of national ownership, pride, responsibility, and heritage,” says the letter.

A promise of stricter vetting

In its own announcement, Vantara has promised to conduct its own assessments of legal acquisition and scientific verification before pursuing the import of any wild animals. It has said that going forward, it will not acquire animals from any facility that isn’t registered or accredited by the exporting country, the CITES Secretariat, or recognised zoological institutions.

Every acquisition will also be in compliance with the government’s imminent Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for animal imports, Vantara has said.

In May, the Supreme Court had dismissed a petition seeking a fresh investigation into Vantara’s operations, but directed the central government to release an SOP as a “forward-looking measure,” which would “give effect to” the recommendations made by the CITES Secretariat. The CITES Secretariat had recommended India strengthen its due diligence of animal imports.

The Court directed the central government to consult the Secretariat when drafting the SOP, with a deadline of three months (excluding the time taken for co-ordination). However, the SOP has not yet been submitted or released.

“Better governance can reduce some of the risks associated with wildlife acquisition, but it does not in itself justify acquisition or captivity,” Meganne Natali, a legal consultant on wildlife crime, who was not a signatory to the letter, told Mongabay India. “This is why I think Vantara’s emerging principle of providing assistance in situ rather than relocating animals is potentially more consequential than the additional compliance machinery itself. If the objective is conservation and animal welfare, the first question should increasingly be: why does this animal need to be moved at all?”

Banner image: A Schmidt’s red-tailed monkey, native to parts of Africa. Representative image by Derek Bruff via Flickr (CC BY-NC 2.0).