1 / 41

SINALOA DRUG CARTEL V. Drug Enforcement Agency

SINALOA DRUG CARTEL V. Drug Enforcement Agency. Cocaine Trafficking Network within the United States . LT Young LT Foster LT Carline. Drug Movement Within the United States. Primary means are private and commercial vehicles. Favor particular routes to supply U.S drug markets.

bridie
Download Presentation

SINALOA DRUG CARTEL V. Drug Enforcement Agency

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. SINALOA DRUG CARTEL V. Drug Enforcement Agency Cocaine Trafficking Network within the United States LT Young LT Foster LT Carline

  2. Drug Movement Within the United States • Primary means are private and commercial vehicles. • Favor particular routes to supply U.S drug markets.

  3. Real World Problem • Cocaine is widely available throughout the country. • Demand for illicit drugs in United States is rising.

  4. MAJOR CITY DISTRIBUTION HUBS 55 125 48 50

  5. Metropolitan Demand • Major city distribution hubs have a maximum limitation on the quantity of metric tons of cocaine which can remain in the city for distribution. • City’s demand for drugs is a function of its metro population and the total population of destination cities.

  6. DESTINATION CITIES METRO POPULATION >1 MIL

  7. DESTINATION CITIES 1 MIL>METRO POPULATION >500,000

  8. DESTINATION CITIES METRO POPULATION<500,000

  9. > 1 Million .5-1 Million > .5 Million

  10. Network Operation • The cartel has well-developed transportation and distribution networks within the U.S. • Extensive network of cities to facilitate the the cartel’s trafficking operations within the U.S. • Destination cities represent the network nodes.

  11. Attack • Interdictions by the Drug Enforcement Agency • Attacks for the cartel to use alternate routes for distribution of the supply to the final destination major city.

  12. Max-Flow Model • Maximize distribution • Maximize profit • Minimize interdiction

  13. Max Flow LP Primal Dual

  14. Quantifications • 278 metric tons • Overall expected seizure percentage is approximately 10%

  15. Model Assumptions • Border seizures • Drug distribution to cities • Constant seizure rate

  16. Abstract Network

  17. Dallas End TUDAL Tucson LA San Diego SDLA Start Update 7 June 2007

  18. interdiction plan with 0 Attacks: flow with interdictions in place = 251.2

  19. interdiction plan with 1 Attacks: attack arc: San Diego -> LA flow with interdictions in place = 245.6

  20. interdiction plan with 2 Attacks: attack arc: San Diego -> LA attack arc: San Diego -> DEN flow with interdictions in place = 215.7

  21. interdiction plan with 3 Attacks: attack arc: Laredo -> HOU attack arc: San Diego -> LA attack arc: San Diego -> DEN flow with interdictions in place = 213.2

  22. interdiction plan with 4 Attacks: attack arc: Chicago -> NY attack arc: Jacksonville -> NY attack arc: SanDiego -> LA attack arc: Tucson -> PHX flow with interdictions in place = 206.7

  23. interdiction plan with 5 Attacks: attack arc: Chicago -> NY attack arc: ElPaso -> HOU attack arc: Jacksonville -> NY attack arc: Laredo -> HOU attack arc: SanDiego -> LA flow with interdictions in place = 197.9

  24. interdiction plan with 6 Attacks: attack arc: Chicago -> NY attack arc: ElPaso -> HOU attack arc: Jacksonville -> NY attack arc: Laredo -> HOU attack arc: SanDiego -> LA attack arc: Tucson -> PHX flow with interdictions in place = 176.8

  25. Operator Resilience Curve

  26. Recommendations for El Chapo • All cases: Maximize Chicago, Dallas, Detroit • If no pending attacks, maximize Los Angeles • 1-3 attacks, maximize Houston, New York • 4-6 attacks maximize Washington DC

  27. LIMITATIONS OF ANALYSIS • Fails to display all possible transit paths for the cartel, i.e. back roads. • Does not account for the time for the routes to transit drugs • Does not account for alternative methods such as noncommercial vessels, ultralight aircraft, freight trains, and tunnels

  28. FUTURE WORK • Smuggling routes within Mexico • Production of the drugs within the United States • Drug distribution operations gangs migrating to areas in Great Lakes, Pacific, and west central regions to expand drug distribution

  29. REFERENCES • National Drug Threat Assessment 2011 • National Drug Intelligence Center • www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs44/44849/​44849p.pdf • www.justice.gov/dea

  30. QUESTIONS?

More Related