Australian Crime Commission
Illicit Drug Data Report
2006–07
ACC
AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION
REVISED EDITION
Correspondence should be addressed to:
Chief Executive Officer
Australian Crime Commission
PO Box 1936 Canberra City
ACT 2601
Telephone:
02 6243 6666 (from within Australia)
61 2 6243 6666 (international)
Facsimile:
02 6243 6687 (from within Australia)
61 2 6243 6687 (international)
Original Edition Published June 2008
Revised Edition Published March 2009
The data contained in this report is produced by the Australian Crime Commission (ACC)
with the endorsement of the eight police commissioners in Australia and the ACC Board.
© Commonwealth of Australia 2009.
This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968,
no part may be reproduced by any process without written permission from the Chief
Executive Officer, Australian Crime Commission.
ISSN 1327-9068
Additional images courtesy of the United States Drug Enforcement Administration.
Foreword
I am pleased to present to you the 2006–07 edition of the Australian Crime Commission’s (ACC)
Illicit Drug Data Report (IDDR).
The IDDR is recognised as one of the most valuable tools for law enforcement agencies, policy
and decision makers, research bodies and other stakeholders in combating illicit drugs. It aims to
inform and educate by providing a statistical overview of illicit drug arrests and seizures as well
as profiling the current situation, national impact and the emerging trends and threats of illicit
drugs in Australia. The document reflects the ACC’s commitment to raising awareness about
illicit drugs in Australia in an effort to help minimise the impact on individuals, their families and
on the community more generally.
In preparing this report, the ACC has relied on the support, expertise and cooperation of a broad
range of law enforcement agencies and drug analytical laboratories. I wish to thank each of
those organisations and their personnel who contributed to the IDDR as well as those in the ACC
who coordinated the production of this publication.
I commend the 2006-07 edition of the IDDR to you and your organisation, and welcome any
feedback you may have.
Alastair Milroy
Chief Executive Officer
Australian Crime Commission
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Contents
Acknowledgements
4
Abbreviations
5
Introduction
6
Key points
7
Amphetamine-type stimulants10
Key points
10
Main forms
11
International trends
14
Domestic trends
15
Domestic market indicators
22
National impact
32
References
34
Cannabis
36
Key points
36
Main forms
37
International trends
38
Domestic trends
39
Domestic market indicators
40
National impact
46
References
46
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Heroin
48
Key points
48
Main forms
49
International trends
50
Domestic trends
51
Domestic market indicators
55
National impact
58
References
59
Cocaine
60
Key points
60
Main forms
61
International trends
61
Domestic trends
62
Domestic market indicators
65
National impact
70
References
71
Other Drugs
72
Key points
72
Anabolic agents and selected hormones73
Main forms
73
International trends
76
Domestic trends
76
Domestic market indicators
79
Statistics
98
Tryptamines
81
Introduction
98
Main forms
81
Counting methodology
98
International trends
82
Data sources
99
Domestic trends
82
Limitations of the data
101
Domestic market indicators
83
Jurisdictional issues
103
Anaesthetics
85
Explanatory notes
106
Main forms
85
Symbols and abbreviations
107
International trends
86
Arrest tables 108
Domestic trends
86
Seizure tables
113
Domestic market indicators
86
Purity tables
115
Pharmaceuticals
87
Price tables
125
Main forms
87
International trends
89
Domestic trends
90
Domestic market indicator
90
Opiates
91
Main forms
91
International trends
92
Domestic trends
92
Domestic market indicators
92
National impact
93
References
94
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Acknowledgements
This report contains data and analysis provided by federal, state and territory police, as well as
forensic laboratories and the Australian Customs Service.
Police and forensic data managers provided significant contribution towards increasing the
quality of the data presented in this report. The ability to draw on their expertise and experience,
along with their continued support, has been invaluable for the Australian Crime Commission.
Key contributors are listed below:
• Australian Capital Territory Government Analytical Laboratory
• Australian Customs Service
• Australian Federal Police
• Australian Federal Police – ACT Policing
• Forensic Science South Australia
• Forensic Science Service Tasmania
• New South Wales Health – Mental Health and Drug and Alcohol Office
• New South Wales Police Force
• Northern Territory Police
• Queensland Health Scientific Services
• Queensland Police Service
• South Australia Police
• Tasmania Police
• Victoria Forensic Science Centre
• Victoria Police
• Western Australia Forensic Science Laboratory
• Western Australia Police
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Abbreviations
AAS
Anabolic and androgenic Steroids
NCETA National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction
ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics
NDARC National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre
ACC Australian Crime Commission
NDIC National Drug Intelligence Centre
ACT Australian Capital Territory
NIDA National Institute on Drug Abuse
AFP Australian Federal Police
NIDRF National Illicit Drug Reporting Format
AIC Australian Institute of Criminology
NSW New South Wales
AIHW Australian Institute of Health and Welfare
NT Northern Territory
ANCD Australian National Council on Drugs
NZ New Zealand
APY Anagu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara
ONDCP Office of National Drug Control Policy
ASADA Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority
P2P Phenyl-2-propanone
ATS Amphetamine-type stimulant
PCP Phencyclidine
BINLEA Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
PIEDs Performance and image enhancing drugs
PMA Paramethoxyamphetamine
BZP N-benzylpiperazine
PMK Piperonylmethylketone
CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research
Organisation
Qld
Queensland
DASSA Drugs and Alcohol Services South Australia
SA South Australia
DCPC Drugs and Crime Prevention Committee
SAR Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of
China
DEA Drug Enforcement Administration
SOCA Serious Organised Crime Agency
DHEA Dehydroepiandrosterone
Tas Tasmania
DOB 4-bromo-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine
TGA Therapeutic Goods Administration
DOM 2,5-dimethoxy-4-methylamphetamine
THC Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol
DUMA Drug Use Monitoring in Australia
EMCDDA European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction
GBL Gamma-butyrolactone
GHB
Gamma-hydroxybutyrate
IDDR Illicit Drug Data Report
INCB International Narcotics Control Board
LSD Lysergic acid diethylamide
MBDB N-methyl-1-(1,3-benzodioxol-5-yl)-2-butanamine
MDA 3,4 methylenedioxyamphetamine
MDEA 3,4-methylenedioxy-N-ethylamphetamine
MDMA 3,4-methylenedioxymethylamphetamine
MSM Dimethylsulphone
4-MTA 4-methylthioamphetamine
UNODC United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
UK United Kingdom
US United States of America
Vic Victoria
WA Western Australia
WCO World Customs Organization
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Introduction
The Australian Crime Commission (ACC) collects data annually from all state and territory police
services, the Australian Federal Police (AFP), the Australian Customs Service (Customs), and the
state and territory drug analytical laboratories. The illicit drug data collected and presented in
this report for the 2006–07 financial year includes:
• consumer and provider arrests;
• seizures;
• purity levels; and
• prices.
The Illicit Drug Data Report is the only report of its type in Australia and provides governments,
law enforcement agencies and interested stakeholders with a national picture of the illicit drug
market. This report provides the data necessary to assess possible future illicit drug trends, and
provides a brief analysis of those trends. It is important to note that the analysis contained in
this report is yearly and may differ from analyses conducted by the individual jurisdictions on a
monthly or quarterly basis.
The purpose of this report is to provide statistics and analysis that will assist decision‑makers in
developing illicit drug supply and harm reduction strategies. The data also assists the Australian
Government to meet national and international reporting obligations.
The ACC continues to utilise the National Illicit Drug Reporting Format to assist in reducing
errors to standardise the data received from each of the law enforcement agencies and other
contributing organisations.
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Key points
Amphetamine-type stimulants
• The largest single detection of MDMA at the Australian border occurred in 2006‑07, totalling
4.4 tonnes.
• The majority of detected amphetamine-type stimulant (ATS) importations at the border are
through the postal stream.
• Significant amounts of ATS precursors continue to be detected in the air cargo stream.
• Clandestine laboratory detections decreased in comparison to 2005–06 but remain
significantly higher than those reported a decade ago.
• ATS seizures accounted for 46 percent of the total weight of national illicit drug seizures,
making it the predominant drug seized.
• The weight of national ATS seizures increased by 320 percent compared with 2005–06. The
number of seizures increased by 33 percent.
Cannabis
• Cannabis remains the most widely used illicit drug in Australia.
• There were 627 detections of cannabis at the border in 2006–07, 24 percent more than the
previous reporting period. However, there was a minor decrease in the weight of cannabis
detected.
• Sixty-two percent of all border detections of cannabis involved the importation of seeds.
• In 2006–07, 69 percent of national drug arrests were for cannabis offences.
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Heroin
• The number of heroin border detections in 2006–07 is the highest on record.
• The weight of heroin detections at the border increased by 65 percent compared with 2005–
06. However, it remains the third lowest weight in the last decade.
• ‘Scatter’ importations through the postal and air cargo streams continue to account for the
largest number of heroin detections.
• South-East Asia remains the primary embarkation point of heroin into Australia. India has
become a key embarkation point.
• In 2006–07, the weight of national heroin seizures increased by 192 percent.
Cocaine
• The total weight of cocaine detected at the border in 2006–07 increased by over 600 percent.
However, it is still lower than the peak detected weight recorded in 2001–02.
• More than half of the total weight of cocaine detected at the Australian border occurred in
sea cargo shipments.
• ‘Scatter’ importations of cocaine in the postal stream continue to be the most frequently
detected method of importation.
• The total weight of cocaine seized nationally increased by approximately 1300 percent
compared with 2005–06. The number of seizures increased by 70 percent.
• In 2006–07, national cocaine arrests increased by over 75 percent.
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Other Drugs
• In 2006–07, the number of border detections of anabolic agents and other selected hormones
was the highest since the peak in 2001–02.
• The maximum individual weight of a ketamine border detection increased from 500 grams in
2005–06 to 10 kilograms in 2006–07.
• Nationally, there was a 63 percent increase in the weight of steroid seizures and a 57 percent
increase in the number of seizures compared with 2005–06.
• In 2006–07, the weight of national tryptamine seizures was at its lowest since 1997–98.
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Amphetaminetype stimulants
Key Points
• The largest single detection of MDMA at the Australian border occurred in 2006–07,
totalling 4.4 tonnes.
• The majority of detected amphetamine-type stimulant (ATS) importations at the border
are through the postal stream.
• Significant amounts of ATS precursors continue to be detected in the air cargo stream.
• Clandestine laboratory detections decreased in comparison to 2005–06 but remain
significantly higher than those reported a decade ago.
• ATS seizures accounted for 46 percent of the total weight of national illicit drug seizures,
making it the predominant drug seized.
• The weight of national ATS seizures increased by 320 percent compared with 2005–06.
The number of seizures increased by 33 percent.
10
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Main Forms
Amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS) are defined by the United Nations Office on Drugs and
Crime (UNODC) as consisting of amphetamine, methylamphetamine, 3,4‑methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) and related products, such as 3,4‑methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA). It
also includes a number of other synthetic stimulants, such as phentermine and methcathinone.
The term stimulants refers to substances that increase brain activity and stimulate the central
nervous system. (UNODC, 2003; 2004).
Amphetamine is synthetically derived from betaphenethylamine, which is a substance similar
to the naturally occurring stimulant ephedrine and hormone adrenaline. Regular use of
amphetamine can lead to dependence, with users finding it difficult to quit or regulate use.
Long-term use of amphetamine may lead to unpredictable behaviour, psychosis, permanent
damage to brain cells and a reliance on other drugs to counteract insomnia (DASSA, 2006).
Methylamphetamine is a potent and highly addictive form of amphetamine. It has been used
in some countries to treat attention deficit disorders, narcolepsy and obesity (ONDCP, 2007).
However, chronic use of methylamphetamine may lead to the onset of violent behaviour, anxiety,
insomnia and psychosis, including auditory and visual hallucinations, and paranoia (DEA, 2006a).
Methylamphetamine is commonly sold in four different forms: powder (sometimes called
‘speed’), base (also referred to as paste), crystal and tablets. A liquid form has also been identified,
however its prevalence and use is considered infrequent (McKetin, McLaren and Kelly, 2005;
O’Brien et al., 2007). Crystalline methylamphetamine, which is also commonly referred to as
‘crystal meth’ or ‘ice,’ is perceived to be the strongest form of methylamphetamine. It is processed
through the re-crystallisation of methylamphetamine powder in a solvent, such as acetone, to
remove impurities (ANCD, n.d; NDIC, 2005).
Phenethylamines are synthetic drugs, similar in chemical composition to amphetamine
and methylamphetamine. The most widely known phenethylamine is MDMA. MDMA, or
3,4‑methylendioxymethamphetamine, is commonly referred to as ‘ecstasy’. MDMA is a
synthetic psychoactive drug that has an hallucinogenic effect on users. The short-term effects
of MDMA can include increased body temperature (hyperthermia), increased heart rate and
blood pressure. This can lead to organ failure and death. Users have also reported withdrawal
symptoms, which include fatigue, loss of appetite and depression (DEA, 2006).
Amphetamine-type stimulants
11
The toxicity of MDMA is unpredictable and its effects may vary from person to person (White,
Boechner and Irvine, 1997). MDMA can be ‘cut’ or combined with other substances, such as
ephedrine and ketamine (TGA, 2004; DEA, 2006). Drugs sold and consumed as ecstasy may
contain little or no MDMA. In its base form, MDMA is a white, musty-smelling oil with a bitter
taste. The base is converted into a salt or powder for processing into capsules or tablets, usually
with a symbol or logo. MDMA derivatives found in Australia include MDA, MDEA and PMA. Table
1 shows the ATS commonly used in Australia.
Table 1: ATS commonly used in Australia
12
Drug type
Common names
Forms
Method of
administration
Amphetamine, dexamphetaminea
Speed, whiz, uppers,
goey, louee, dexies,
pep pills
White, yellow, pink
or brown powder or
tablets
Oral, intranasal,
injection, analb
Methylamphetamine
Meth, speed, whiz,
fast, uppers, goey,
louee, Lou Reedc,
rabbitc, tailc, pep pills;
in paste form, can be
referred to as base,
pure or wax; in liquid
form, can be referred
to as leopard’s blood,
ox blood, red speed or
liquid red
White, yellow or
brown powder, paste,
tablets or a red liquid
Oral, intranasal,
injection, analb
Crystalline methylamphetamine
hydrochloride (Dmethylamphetamine)—purified
methylamphetamine
Ice, meth, d-meth,
glass, crystal, batu,
shabu (from the
Philippines)
Crystal—resembles
crushed ice
Smoking, intranasal,
injection
3,4methylenedioxymethamphetamine
(MDMA)
XTC, X, Ecstasy, Adam,
M & M, eccy, E, Go,
Scooby Snacks, hug,
beans
Tablet, geltab,
powder, capsule
Oral, intranasal,
smoking, injecting
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Table 1: ATS commonly used in Australia (cont’d)
Drug type
Common names
Forms
Method of
administration
3,4methylenedioxyethylamphetamine
(MDEA)
Eve
Tablet
Oral
3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine
(MDA)
Love bug, Crystal, P,
Window Pane
Tablet
Oral
N-methyl-1-(1,3-benzodioxol-5-yl)-2butanamine (MBDB)
Eden
Tablet
Oral
Paramethoxyamphetamine (PMA)d
Death, Dr Death,
Mitsubishi Double
Tablet, powder,
capsule
Oral, intranasal,
injecting (rare)
4-bromo-2,5dimethoxyphenethylamine
Nexus, 2-CB, bromo,
TWOs
Tablet (Nexus),
blotting paper,
powder
Oral, intranasal
4-bromo-2,5dimethoxyamphetamine (DOB)e
DOB, 4-bromo-DMA,
bromo
Tablet, blotting paper
Oral
2,5-dimethoxy-4methylamphetamine (DOM)f
DOM, STP
Tablet, blotting paper
Oral
4-methylthioamphetamine (4-MTA)
Flatliner, Golden Eagle
Tablet
Oral
a. Dexamphetamine (also known as dextroamphetamine sulphate) is sold in tablet form in Australia for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
(ADHD) and narcolepsy, in accordance with state and territory laws. It is also used illicitly.
b. In tablet form, the drug can be inserted into the anus or the vagina to avoid the irritation to the user’s stomach, which commonly occurs
when taken orally (also known as 'shafting' or 'shelving').
c. Terminology noted in Queensland.
d. PMA has stimulant and hallucinogenic properties. It is an analogue of MDMA with broadly similar effects.
e. Strong effect–low effective dose.
f. Similar dose to DOB.
Source: ACC, Australian Government Analytical Laboratories, South Australia Forensic Science Centre.
Amphetamine-type stimulants
13
International trends
ATS production is not limited to particular regions of the world and large-scale production
continues to occur in various countries. Brunei, Cambodia, Japan, Laos, the Philippines and
Thailand ranked methylamphetamine as their most widely used illicit drug (UNODC, 2007).
Methylamphetamine production in the United States of America (US) has decreased with
continued displacement to Mexico. This has been caused by a number of factors such as the
circumvention of chemical sales and importation restrictions by Mexican drug trafficking
organisations (NDIC, 2007a). Domestic production and consumption of methylamphetamine in
South Africa has also increased (UNODC, 2007a).
The detection of a large-scale ATS laboratory in Malaysia in 2006 highlights the continued role
of South-East Asia as a global ATS production hub. In particular, large-scale ATS production and
trafficking remains prevalent in Myanmar. The US Department of State has noted that drug
syndicates continue to operate freely along Myanmar’s borders with China and Thailand (BINLEA,
2007). In 2006, approximately eight tonnes of crystal methylamphetamine was reported seized in
the East Asia and Pacific regions, compared to approximately seven tonnes in 2005 (UNODC, 2007).
In spite of global efforts to combat the ATS precursor trade, criminal syndicates have continued
to successfully divert substantial quantities of ATS precursors into illicit manufacture.
Internationally, the diversion of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, as well as other ATS precursor
chemicals, remains a significant area of concern. In 2006, the International Narcotics Control
Board (INCB) noted a series of diversions or attempted diversions of multi-tonne consignments
of pseudoephedrine between several African countries. Countries in the European Union (EU)
have emerged as important transhipment points for the movement of ATS precursors from West
Africa to Mexico (INCB, 2006).
In 2006–07, the Australian Federal Police (AFP) seized approximately 58 kilograms of ATS
(excluding MDMA) and 467 kilograms of precursor chemicals. This included the April 2007
seizure of 125 kilograms of phenylacetic acid consigned from India and 44 kilograms of
ephedrine from Vietnam in March 2007.
14
Figure includes detections of MDMA precursors.
Statistics are drawn from the EIS report run on 25 September 2007. Due to time differences between seizure, full deconstruction and forensic
analysis dates, final seizure weights may vary.
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
The production, trafficking and use of MDMA have remained prevalent in several countries.
In the United Kingdom (UK), an estimated 500,000–2,000,000 MDMA tablets are consumed
weekly (SOCA, 2006). The Netherlands and Belgium remain the primary manufacture and
supply points of MDMA to the global market, with syndicates operating in various EU countries
(UNODC, 2007a). MDMA manufacture continues to be noted in non-traditional MDMA producing
countries, such as Canada (UNODC, 2007a; NDIC, 2007). China remains a predominant source of
MDMA precursors for the global market (Fowler, Kinner and Krenske, 2007).
Precursors, illicit drugs and chemical waste from ATS manufacture are being regularly trafficked
between EU countries to complete production, tableting, packaging and waste dumping
operations (Europol, 2006).
Domestic trends
Australian border situation
The Australian Customs Service (Customs) regularly detects methylamphetamine, crystal
methylamphetamine and tablets containing other ATS. The trend of importing multiple, small
quantity consignments has continued, with detections of ATS (excluding phenethylamines)
increasing from 423 in 2005–06 to 743 in 2006–07. However, over this period, the total weight of
ATS (excluding phenethylamines) detected at the border decreased from 88 kilograms to 27.4
kilograms (see Figure 1).
The 2006–07 Australian Customs Service Annual Report defines amphetamine-type stimulants (ATS) as including methylamphetamine and
amphetamine but excluding MDMA (ecstasy) (Australian Customs Service, 2007).
Amphetamine-type stimulants
15
Figure 1: Number and weight of detections of ATS (excluding phenethylamines) at the Australian
border, 1996–97 to 2006–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
Number
450
800
400
700
350
600
300
500
250
400
200
300
150
100
200
50
100
2006–07
2005–06
2004–05
2003–04
2002–03
2001–02
2000–01
1999–2000
1998–99
1997–98
0
1996–97
0
Number
Weight (kg)
Weight
Year
Over 95 percent of detected ATS (excluding phenethylamines) importations in 2006‑07 were in
the postal stream. In this period, importations via the postal stream also accounted for 46 percent
of the total weight of detected ATS (excluding phenethylamines), an increase from 28 percent in
2005–06. There were no sea cargo shipments detected in 2006–07 (see Figures 2 and 3).
Only 24 out of 743 border detections of ATS (excluding phenethylamines) contained 100 grams
or more of these drugs. Of these, 13 originated in North America (11 in Canada), and 7 in
South-East Asia. It is noted that there has been a major increase in the number of detections
of ATS (excluding phenethylamines) from Canada.
16
The term ‘originated’ describes the origin of the transport stage into Australia; otherwise referred to as the embarkation point.
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Figure 2: Number of detections of ATS (excluding phenethylamines) at the Australian border, as a
proportion of total detections, by method of importation, 2006–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
Air Cargo (3.1%)
Air Passenger/Crew (1.5%)
Parcels Post (95.4%)
Figure 3: Weight of detections of ATS (excluding phenethylamines) at the Australian border, as a
proportion of total weight, by method of importation, 2006–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
Air Cargo (43.1%)
Air Passenger/Crew (11.3%)
Parcels Post (45.6%)
Amphetamine-type stimulants
17
The number of MDMA detections at the Australian border has declined from 135 in 2005–06 to
113 in 2006–07. However, the total weight of detections increased by 1,104 percent in 2006–07,
up from 434.8 kilograms in 2005–06 to 5234.4 kilograms (see Figure 4). Only 11 out of 113 MDMA
detections were above one kilogram. These accounted for 99.8 percent of the weight of MDMA
detected at the Australian border in 2006–07.
Figure 4: Number and weight of detections of phenethylamines at the Australian border, 1996–
97 to 2006–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
Weight (kg)
Number
6000
350
5000
300
Weight (kg)
200
3000
150
2000
Number
250
4000
100
1000
50
2006–07
2005–06
2004–05
2003–04
2002–03
2001–02
2000–01
1999–2000
1998–99
1997–98
0
1996–97
0
Year
The majority of detections (by number) occurred in the postal stream. In terms of weight, the
largest proportion of detections occurred in sea cargo, with an increase from 91 percent in 2005–06
to 95 percent in 2006–07. There was also an increase in air cargo detections. These accounted for 4
percent of the total weight in 2006–07, compared to 0.02 percent in 2005–06 (see Figures 5 and 6).
18
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Figure 5: Number of detections of phenethylamines at the Australian border, as a proportion of
total detections, by method of importation, 2006–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
Air Cargo (1.8%)
Air Passenger/Crew (6.2%)
Parcels Post (88.5%)
Sea Cargo (3.5%)
Figure 6: Weight of detections of phenethylamines at the Australian border, as a proportion of
total weight, by method of importation, 2006–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
Air Cargo (4.0%)
Air Passenger/Crew (0.1%)
Parcels Post (0.7%)
Sea Cargo (95.2%)
Amphetamine-type stimulants
19
Significant border detections
Significant border detections of ATS (excluding phenethylamines) in 2006–07 included:
• 1.5 kilograms of crystal methylamphetamine was detected in lever-arched folders consigned
as air cargo from Canada to Sydney on 21 March 2007.
• 1.2 kilograms of methylamphetamine concealed in a vacuum-sealed plastic bag between two
magazines, in air cargo from the US, was detected in Sydney on 14 December 2006.
• 1 kilogram of crystal methylamphetamine was detected in the walls of a green felt box
consigned as air cargo from Canada to Sydney on 30 March 2007.
• 0.5 kilograms of crystal methylamphetamine was detected in a plastic statue on a wooden
plaque, consigned as air cargo from Canada to Melbourne on 29 March 2007.
• In the period of May to June 2007, over 130 attempted importations of crystal
methylamphetamine were detected in letter class mail from Canada.
Significant border detections of MDMA in 2006–07 included:
• 4,422 kilograms of MDMA tablets sent from Italy were detected on 28 June 2007. This is the
largest single detection of MDMA at the Australian border.
• 113 kilograms of bulk MDMA powder sent from Israel was detected in Sydney on 31 March
2007. The powder was estimated to be sufficient to manufacture at least 1.2 million tablets.
• 31 kilograms of MDMA tablets, concealed in computer monitors and shipped by sea cargo
from Canada to Brisbane, were detected on 9 September 2006. This shipment also contained
135 kilograms of cocaine.
Precursors
ATS precursors, especially ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, continue to be imported into
Australia. This is evident by the large quantities imported through the air cargo stream in 2006–
07. The two largest shipments were linked:
• 68 kilograms of ephedrine powder was detected in cosmetic packs and cosmetic creams in air
cargo from Vietnam to Sydney on 24 March 2007; and
20
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
• 45 kilograms of ephedrine powder was detected in cosmetic products from Vietnam to
Sydney on 14 March 2007.
As domestic restrictions on ephedrine tighten, it is expected that bulk importations of ATS
precursors will continue.
There were no significant detections of MDMA precursors in 2006–07. Potential MDMA
precursors that may be sought include safrole (in the form of safrole-rich, natural oils) and
piperonylmethylketone (PMK, also known as 3,4-MDP-2-P), a liquid MDMA precursor. PMK is
reported to be the main substance used in the production of MDMA in Western Europe.
Embarkation points
Approximately 29 percent of the number of ATS (excluding MDMA) detections originated from
India, 19 percent from Canada and 15 percent from the Netherlands.
In 2006–07, detected methylamphetamine importations originated, in weight order, from,
Canada (83 percent of total weight), the US, Malaysia, South Africa, Vietnam, the Philippines, the
UK, Indonesia, Thailand, China, Greece, Spain, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR)
of China, New Zealand and Romania.
Phentermine, a weight-loss promoting drug, contributes to Customs’ ATS detection statistics.
Phentermine is generally imported for personal use from countries where it is legally available
without prescription, mainly from India, the Netherlands, Germany and South-East Asia. The large
number of attempts to import phentermine tablets by mail order, which are captured by ATS
detection statistics, complicates the analysis of embarkation points of ATS imported to Australia.
Countries of embarkation for MDMA shipments weighing over one kilogram were, in weight
order, Italy (85 percent of total weight), the Netherlands, Belgium, Israel, Canada, the UK, Taiwan,
Vietnam, the US and Ireland. The majority of the world’s MDMA is produced in the Netherlands
and Belgium (UNODC, 2007a). The majority of these countries of embarkation reflect the
traditional European origin of MDMA trafficking to Australia.
Amphetamine-type stimulants
21
Domestic market indicators
According to a 2007 national study of regular ecstasy users, use of any form of
methylamphetamine (powder, base or crystal) decreased from 82 percent in 2006 to 71 percent
in 2007. Frequency of use remained low, with powder, base or crystal being used approximately
once a month or less (Black et al., 2007). A 2006 national study of regular ecstasy users reported
that 64 percent of respondents used ‘speed’ or powder in the six months preceding interview.
This was followed by ‘crystal’ at 49 percent and base at 34 percent of respondents (Dunn et al.,
2007). Reports have identified a recent trend of increased crystal methylamphetamine use in
specific public places such as nightclubs and pubs (Schloenhardt, 2007).
A national study of injecting drug users reported that frequency of use of methylamphetamine
(powder, base or crystal) remained relatively stable. Overall, recent methylamphetamine use
remains high, with more than 70 percent of respondents reporting use in the six months
preceding interview. The same study also reported that 21 percent of the respondents
nominated methylamphetamine as their drug of choice (Black, Stafford and Degenhardt, 2007a).
The domestic illicit manufacture of methylamphetamine continues to be a problem,
with precursors such as pseudoephedrine being extracted from ‘commercially available’
pharmaceuticals (Fowler, Kinner and Krenske, 2007). The national implementation of Project STOP
may assist in reducing the diversion of these pharmaceuticals to the illicit market for use in the
domestic manufacture of methylamphetamine. Whilst Project STOP is a national initiative, its
nationwide implementation is not complete.
Project STOP is a real-time online recording system which aims to restrict the misuse of
pseudoephedrine-based medications. The online system is a decision support tool for
pharmacists to help them distinguish legitimate customers from potential ‘pseudo‑runners’. The
system also allows police and health authorities real-time access to the data. It employs global
positioning system (GPS) mapping, allowing the movements of potential ‘pseudo runners’ to be
graphically displayed in real time.
22
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Successfully trialled in Queensland since October 2005, Project STOP has contributed to a 23
percent decrease in the number of clandestine laboratories detected in Queensland, from 209
in 2004–05 to 161 in 2005–06 (The Pharmacy Guild of Australia, 2007). However, any reductions
in domestic supply could see an increase in border detections of precursor chemicals as drug
manufacturers search for alternate sources. As reported overseas, there may also be increases in
other types of crimes such as the use of fraudulent identities to obtain precursors (NDIC, 2007a).
Although MDMA continues to be imported into Australia, there is continued evidence of
significant domestic illicit manufacture. Recent seizures of precursor chemicals and clandestine
laboratories indicate MDMA is still being domestically produced. Nationally, the number of
MDMA clandestine laboratories detected have fluctuated over recent years. Figures varied from
24 in 2003–04, 7 in 2005–06 to 19 in 2006–07. It is emphasised that the number of detections
may not be a true indicator of the potential size of MDMA production. In New South Wales,
MDMA clandestine laboratories have been identified containing multi-hundred litre reaction
vessels. These indicate a potential for significant domestic production capacity.
According to a 2007 national study of regular ecstasy users, use and availability levels remain
consistent with previous years. Approximately one quarter of respondents reported using
ecstasy once per week or more often (Black et al., 2007). Although trends indicate a stabilisation
in use and availability, the World Drug Report 2007 nominated Australia as having the world’s
highest level of ecstasy use in the general population (Schloenhardt, 2007; UNODC, 2007a).
Price
Nationally, the price of crystal methylamphetamine ranged from $200 to $500 per gram. The
highest price was reported in New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory, with the
lowest also reported in New South Wales. The price of non-crystal methylamphetamine ranged
from $50 to $380 per gram. The highest reported price was in Tasmania and the lowest was
reported in South Australia.
Across the reporting jurisdictions, the street price for a single MDMA tablet/capsule has
remained relatively unchanged. In Tasmania, the price of MDMA tablets increased from a range of
$25–$40 in 2005-06 to a price of $40 in 2006–07. In Victoria, the price of MDMA decreased from
a minimum price of $21 per tablet in 2005–06 to $14 in 2006–07. New South Wales reported the
largest range in price, with tablets costing from $30 to $60 each.
Amphetamine-type stimulants
23
Purity
The purity levels listed in this report are not representative of all drug seizures. Not all drugs
seized by police are subject to forensic analysis and, in some instances, seized drugs are only
analysed for contested court proceedings. Therefore, the purity figures reflected in this report are
an unrepresentative sample of the illicit drugs available in Australia. Overall, seizures by the AFP
will generally be of higher purity as border seizures are likely to contain a lower concentration of
additives and cutting agents.
It is difficult to assess the actual purity levels of crystal methylamphetamine in the community.
Purity levels of methylamphetamine may be influenced by the use of adulterants, such as
dimethylsulphone. Dimethylsulphone (also known as MSM) is a dietary supplement for arthritis
sufferers which may be added during the final stages of the production process to give a similar
appearance to crystal methylamphetamine (NDIC, 2002; Fetherston and Lenton, 2006). Hence,
some users may believe they are consuming a higher purity form of methylamphetamine when
they may be consuming a lower purity form with a crystal appearance.
Research on drug use amongst police detainees (incorporating surveys and urinalysis) indicates
discrepancies between urinalysis results and self reported data for MDMA. Approximately two
percent of the police detainees tested positive to MDMA. Of the 10 percent who stated they
had used MDMA in the past 48 hours, only 56 percent tested positive to MDMA. According to
urinalysis, of the 44 percent who did not test positive to MDMA, nearly half tested positive to
methylamphetamine (Mouzos et al., 2007). This highlights that drugs sold as MDMA or ecstasy
may contain little or no MDMA.
Since 2002, the purity levels of amphetamine have fluctuated considerably across the
jurisdictions (see Figure 7). The median purity level of amphetamines in Australia ranged from 0.4
percent to 59.5 percent in 2006–07. However, it should be noted that spikes in purity levels may
be the result of analysis of a small sample only and may not be indicative of general purity.
The purity levels of methylamphetamine and phenethylamines have remained relatively stable
across the jurisdictions since 2005 (see Figures 8 and 9). Nationally, the median purity level of
methylamphetamine ranged from 7.3 percent to 25.8 percent in 2006–07. Methylamphetamine
purity levels decreased in New South Wales and South Australia during the second quarter of
2007.
24
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
The median purity level of phenethylamines in Australia ranged from 21 percent to 54.7 percent
in 2006–07. The purity level of phenethylamines increased slightly in New South Wales and
Victoria during the second quarter of 2007.
Figure 7: Median purity of amphetamine samples, 2002–03 to 2006–07
NSW
100
VIC
QLD
SA
WA
ACT
90
80
60
50
40
30
20
10
q2 2007
q1 2007
q4 2006
q3 2006
q2 2006
q1 2006
q4 2005
q3 2005
q2 2005
q1 2005
q4 2004
q3 2004
q2 2004
q1 2004
q4 2003
q3 2003
q2 2003
q1 2003
q4 2002
0
q3 2002
Purity (%)
70
Quarter
Amphetamine-type stimulants
25
26
Quarter
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
q2 2007
q2 2007
q1 2007
q4 2006
q3 2006
q2 2006
WA
q1 2007
q4 2006
WA
q3 2006
q1 2006
q4 2005
q3 2005
SA
q2 2006
SA
q1 2006
QLD
q4 2005
q2 2005
q1 2005
q4 2004
QLD
q3 2005
q2 2005
VIC
q1 2005
q3 2004
q2 2004
q1 2004
VIC
q4 2004
q3 2004
NSW
q2 2004
q4 2003
q3 2003
q2 2003
q1 2003
NSW
q1 2004
q4 2003
50
q3 2003
q2 2003
q4 2002
q3 2002
Purity (%)
80
q1 2003
q4 2002
q3 2002
Purity (%)
Figure 8: Median purity of methylamphetamine samples, 2002–03 to 2006–07
90
ACT
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Quarter
Figure 9: Median purity of phenethylamines samples, 2002–03 to 2006–07
60
ACT
40
30
20
10
0
Availability
A national study of injecting drug users reported the availability of methylamphetamine
(speed and base) as ‘very easy’ or ‘easy’ to obtain in most jurisdictions. Seventy-eight percent of
respondents considered crystal or ‘ice’ to be ‘easy’ or ‘very easy’ to obtain (O’Brien et al., 2007).
Similarly, MDMA was also considered by injecting drug users to be ‘very easy’ or ‘easy’ to obtain
in all jurisdictions in 2006 (Black et al., 2007).
Clandestine laboratories
A moderate decrease in clandestine laboratory detections was reported in 2006–07. While
detections are still higher than those reported a decade ago, they appear to have stabilised (see
Figure 10). The stabilisation of laboratory detections may in part be due to product rescheduling
and restrictions placed on the purchase of pseudoephedrine-based pharmaceutical products.
The rescheduling of the majority of these products resulted in tighter restrictions on purchases,
such as the presentation of photographic identification and recording of customer details.
Medications containing greater concentrations of pseudoephedrine are now listed as Schedule 4
drugs, requiring them to be sold by prescription only.
However, the stabilisation of laboratory detections may also have been impacted upon by the
further implementation of Project STOP. Initially trialled in Queensland, Project STOP is to be
implemented throughout the country as part of the National Strategy to Prevent the Diversion of
Precursor Chemicals into Illicit Drug Manufacture (The Pharmacy Guild of Australia, 2007).
Victoria, Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory all reported increases in clandestine
laboratory detections in 2006–07. Of these, the most significant increase was seen in Victoria.
New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia and the Northern Territory all reported
decreases in detections. The most significant decrease was reported in Queensland from 161
detections in 2005–06 to 132 in 2006–07.
The majority of detected ATS clandestine laboratories in Australia utilise the hypophosphorous
acid method of production, which requires pseudoephedrine as a precursor (see Table 3).
Results of NDARC surveys conducted related to the respondent’s knowledge of tablets sold as MDMA, regardless of their actual composition.
Amphetamine-type stimulants
27
In 2006–07, ATS clandestine laboratory detections (see Table 4) decreased by 11 percent (from
280 to 249) and MDMA clandestine laboratory detections increased by 171 percent (from 7 to
19). ‘Homebake heroin’ clandestine laboratory detections increased by 125 percent (from 4 to 9).
‘Homebake heroin’ is further discussed in the chapter entitled Heroin.
New South Wales experienced an increase from 7 MDMA clandestine laboratories in 2005–06 to
16 in 2006–07. The detection of five clandestine laboratories in the Australian Capital Territory
was responsible for the overall increase in ‘homebake heroin’ clandestine laboratory detections.
In 2005–06, Western Australia was the only jurisdiction to report ‘homebake heroin’ clandestine
laboratory detections. The number of ‘homebake heroin’ detections in Western Australia in this
reporting period remained unchanged at four.
Figure 10: Total national clandestine laboratory detections, 1997–98 to 2006–07
450
400
350
Number
300
250
200
150
100
50
Year
28
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
2006–07
2005–06
2004–05
2003–04
2002–03
2001–02
2000–01
1999–2000
1998–99
1997–98
0
Table 2: Number of clandestine laboratory detections, by state and territory, 1997–98 to 2006–07
NSW
VIC
QLD
SA
WA
TAS
NT
ACT
Total
1997–98
19
9
55
7
3
2
0
0
95
1998–99
20
4
83
12
8
0
2
2
131
1999–2000
20
18
79
14
17
0
1
1
150
2000–01
42
32
77
24
22
1
3
0
201
2001–02
32
24
138
32
22
3
1
0
252
2002–03
47
19
171
34
36
2
3
2
314
2003–04
61
20
189
48
33
1
6
0
358
2004–05
45
31
209
25
44
3
21
3
381
2005–06
55
47
161
50
58
5
12
2
390
2006–07
49
72
132
51
37
9
1
5
356
Table 3: Numbera of ATS clandestine laboratory detections, by method of production and state
and territory, 2006–07
Hypophosphorous
Red
phosphorous
Nazi
method
P2P
PSEb
extraction
Total
NSW
15
2
0
4
0
21
Vic
32
6
11
3
5
57
Qld
51
3
0
3
0
57
SA
24
3
0
0
13
40
WA
6
3
11
1
0
21
Tas
6
2
0
0
0
8
NT
1
0
0
0
0
1
ACT
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
135
19
22
11
18
205
State/territory
a. These figures exclude unknown production processes and non‑ATS drug types.
b. Pseudoephedrine extraction.
Amphetamine-type stimulants
29
Table 4: Number of clandestine laboratory detections, by drug production types and state and
territory, 2006–07
ATSa
MDMA
Cocaine
extraction
Homebake
heroin
Other
Total
NSW
25
16
0
0
8
49
Vic
72
0
0
0
0
72
Qld
60
3
0
0
69
132
SA
50
0
0
0
1
51
WA
32
0
0
4
1
37
Tas
9
0
0
0
0
9
NT
1
0
0
0
0
1
ACT
0
0
0
5
0
5
Total
249
19
0
9
79
356
State/territory
a. Excludes MDMA.
Seizures and arrests
The number of national ATS seizures in 2006–07 is the highest on record (see Figure 11).
Compared to the previous reporting period, the number of seizures increased by 33 percent in
2006–07. Jurisdictional breakdowns of seizure numbers and weights are shown in Table 5.
In 2006–07, the number of seizures increased in all jurisdictions, with the exception of South
Australia and the Australian Capital Territory. New South Wales reported the largest increase
in seizure numbers. The highest percentage increase in seizure numbers occurred in Tasmania,
which increased by 118 percent.
As a result of the significant border detection of MDMA in June 2007, the weight of national
ATS seizures in 2006–07 was the highest on record. In comparison to 2005‑06, there was a 320
percent increase in the weight of national ATS seizures. Victoria reported the highest seizure
weight and the greatest percentage weight increase. A considerable increase in seizure weight
was also reported in Queensland and Tasmania. Decreases in seizure weights were reported in
South Australia, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory.
30
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Nationally, there was a 28 percent increase in the number of ATS arrests when compared to
2005–06 (see Table 6). With the exception of South Australia, all jurisdictions reported an increase
in ATS arrests in 2006–07.
Figure 11: National ATS seizures, by weight and number, 1997–98 to 2006–07
6,000
Weight (kg)
14,000
Number
12,000
10,000
4,000
8,000
3,000
6,000
2,000
Number
Weight (kg)
5,000
4,000
1,000
2,000
2006–07
2005–06
2004–05
2003–04
2002–03
2001–02
2000–01
1999–2000
1998–99
0
1997–98
0
Year
Table 5: Number, weight and percentage change of national ATS seizures, 2005–06 and 2006–07
Number
State/territorya
Weight (grams)
2005–06
2006–07
% change
2005–06
2006–07
% change
3,040
4,436r
45.9r
677,811
846,398r
24.9r
Vic
795
1,442r
81.4r
493,737
4,449,469r
801.2r
Qld
2,492
2,724
9.3
23,281
98,233
321.9
SA
268
219
-18.3
66,942
7,027
-89.5
WA
2,891
3,828r
32.4r
25,165
34,926r
38.8r
Tas
109
238
118.3
495
4,209
750.3
NT
100
128r
28.0r
7,251
1,413r
-80.5r
ACT
292
228
-21.9
1,942
1,318
-32.1
Total
9,987
13,243r
32.6r
1,296,624
5,442,993r
319.8r
NSW
a. Includes seizures by state/territory police and AFP for which a valid seizure weight was recorded.
Amphetamine-type stimulants
31
Table 6: Number and percentage change of national ATS arrests, 2005–06 and 2006–07
Arrests
2005–06
2006–07
% change
NSW
2,462
3,416r
38.8
Vic
2,838
3,407r
20.0
Qld
3,844
4,437
15.4
SA
518
500
-3.5
WA
1,903
3,011
58.2
Tas
83
179
115.7
NT
94
134
42.6
ACT
106
132
24.5
Total
11,848
15,216
28.4
State/ territorya
a. Includes arrests by state/territory police and AFP.
National impact
In 2006–07, the number of border detections of ATS (excluding phenethylamines) increased
by 76 percent. The majority of these were detected through the postal stream. However, the
weight of ATS (excluding phenethylamines) detections at the border decreased approximately
69 percent. Of the total weight of methylamphetamine border detections, 83 percent were from
Canada. Canada also accounted for 78 percent of the total number of methylamphetamine
detections.
The number of phenethylamine detections at the border decreased in 2006–07, with the
majority of detections occurring through the postal stream. The total weight of detections
increased by 1,104 percent in 2006–07, with sea cargo detections accounting for 95 percent of
the total weight.
Considerable quantities of ATS precursors, such as ephedrine, are also being detected at the
border. Continued significant detections of ATS precursor chemicals may also indicate the
existence of a stable domestic market.
32
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Despite a moderate decrease in the number of clandestine laboratory detections during
2006–07, the number of detections have remained relatively stable since 2003–04. The domestic
manufacture of methylamphetamine continues to dominate the ATS market in Australia.
Recent decreases in laboratory detections may be attributable to the restrictions placed on
pseudoephedrine-based products in Australia. These restrictions may lead to changes in ATS
manufacturing methods and the sourcing of precursors (for example, increased importation of
precursors or finished ATS product).
Increases in MDMA clandestine laboratory detections also indicate potential growth in local
MDMA manufacture, but do not necessarily reflect a significant change in overall user demand.
Both the weight and number of national ATS seizures are the highest on record. Since 2005–06,
the weight of ATS seizures increased 320 percent, with the number of seizures increasing by 33
percent. There was also a 28 percent increase in the number of national ATS arrests. The increases
in ATS seizures and arrests may indicate a significant increase in its use and availability.
Historically, cannabis has accounted for the greatest proportion of the total weight of national
illicit drug seizures. In this reporting period, ATS seizures accounted for 46 percent while cannabis
accounted for 41 percent. As a result, ATS was the predominant illicit drug seized.
Amphetamine-type stimulants
33
References
Australian Customs Service (Customs), 2007. Annual Report 2006–07 (online). <http://www.customs.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/
AnnualReport06_07_Full.pdf> [Accessed 17 January 2008].
Australian National Council on Drugs (ANCD), n.d. Methamphetamines – Position Paper (online).
<http://www.ancd.org.au/publications/pdf/pp_methamphetamines.pdf> [Accessed 4 December 2007].
Black, E., Stafford, J., Dunn, M. and Degenhardt, L., 2007. An overview of the 2007 EDRS: the regular ecstasy user survey findings (online). EDRS Drug
trends bulletin, October 2007, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney. <http://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.
au/NDARCWeb.nsf/resources/Bulletins_2007/$file/EDRS+BULLETIN+OCTOBER+2007.pdf> [Accessed 17 December 2007].
Black, E., Stafford, J. and Degenhardt, L. , 2007a. An overview of the 2007 IDRS: the Injecting Drug User survey findings (online). Drug Trends Bulletin,
October, Sydney: National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales. <http://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/NDARCWeb.nsf/
resources/Bulletins+_2007.2/$file/IDRS+BULLETIN+OCTOBER+2007.pdf> [Accessed 17 December 2007].
Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (BINLEA), 2007. International Narcotics Control Strategy Report: Volume 1 Drug and
Chemical Control (online). United States Department of State, Vol. 1, March 2007. <http://www.state.gov/p/inl/rls/nrcrpt/2007/vol1/pdf/index.
htm> [Accessed 17 December 2007].
DASSA see Drugs and Alcohol Services South Australia.
DEA see U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.
Drugs and Alcohol Services South Australia (DASSA), 2006. Illicit Drugs and their effects: Amphetamines (online). <http://www.dassa.sa.gov.au/site/
page.cfm?u=126> [Accessed 17 December 2007].
Dunn, M., Degenhardt, L., Campbell, G., George, J., Johnston, J., Kinner, S., Matthews, A., Newman, J., and White, N., 2007. Australian Trends in Ecstasy
and Related Drug Markets 2006: Findings from the Ecstasy and Related Drugs Reporting System (EDRS), Monograph No. 61, National Drug and Alcohol
Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney.
Europol, 2006. Drugs 2006 (online), March 2006. <http://www.europol.europa.eu/publications/Serious_Crime_Overviews/drugs2005.pdf>
[Accessed 27 February 2008]
Fetherston, J. and Lenton, S., 2006. West Australian drug trends 2005: Findings from the Illicit Drug Reporting System (IDRS), NDARC Technical Report
No. 252, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney.
Fowler, G., Kinner, S. and Krenske, L., 2007. Containing ecstasy: analytical tools for profiling an illegal drug market (online). Monograph Series No. 27,
National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund. <http://www.ndlerf.gov.au/pub/Monograph_27.pdf> [Accessed 17 January 2008].
International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), 2006. Analysis of the World Situation: Africa, Report of the International Narcotics Control Board (online).
<http://www.incb.org/incb/en/annual_report_2006.html> [Accessed 5 December 2007].
International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), 2007. Annual Report – Press Release 3 – Regional Highlights (online).
<http://www.incb.org/pdf/e/press/2007/annual-report-press-kit-2006-en-3.pdf> [Accessed 5 December 2007].
McKetin, R., McLaren, J, Kelly, E., 2005. The Sydney methamphetamine market: Patterns of supply, use, personal harms and social consequences (online).
Monograph Series 13, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales. <http://www.ndlerf.gov.au/pub/Sydney_Meth_
Final_Report.pdf> [Accessed 17 December 2007].
Mouzos, J., Hind, N., Smith, L. and Adams, K., 2007. Drug use monitoring in Australia: 2006 annual report on drug use among police detainees (online).
Research and public policy series, no. 75, Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. <http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/rpp/75/> [Accessed 5
December 2007].
National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), 2002. Crystal Methamphetamine (online). Information Bulletin, United States Department of Justice,
August 2002. <http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs1/1837/1837p.pdf> [Accessed 4 December 2007].
National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), 2005. Methamphetamine Drug Threat Assessment (online). United States Department of Justice, March
2005. <http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs11/13853/avail.htm> [Accessed 4 December 2007].
National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), 2007. National Drug Threat Assessment 2008 (online). United States Department of Justice, October 2007.
<http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs25/25921/25921p.pdf> [Accessed 17January 2008].
34
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), 2007a. National Methamphetamine Threat Assessment 2008 (online). United States Department of Justice,
December 2007. <http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs26/26594/26594p.pdf> [Accessed 17 January 2008].
O’Brien, S., Black, E., Degenhardt, L., Roxburgh, A., Campbell, G., de Graaff, B., Fetherston, J., Jenkinson, R., Kinner, S., Moon, C. and White, N., 2007.
Australian Drug Trends 2006: Findings from the Illicit Drug Reporting System (IDRS), Monograph No. 60, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre,
University of New South Wales, Sydney.
Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), 2007. Methamphetamine (online). Drug Facts, Executive Office of the President of the United
States. <http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/drugfact/methamphetamine/index.html> [Accessed 7 November 2007].
Schloenhardt, A., 2007. The market for amphetamine-type stimulants and their precursors in Oceania (online). Research and Public Policy Series,
no.81, Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. <http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/rpp/81/rpp81.pdf> [Accessed 5 December 2007].
Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA), 2006. The United Kingdom Threat Assessment of Serious and Organised Crime 2006/7 (online). London.
<http://www.soca.gov.uk/assessPublications/downloads/threat_assess_unclass_250706.pdf> [Accessed 11 December 2007].
The Pharmacy Guild of Australia, 2007. Project Stop Victory (online). Media Release, May 2007. <http://www.guild.org.au/uploadedfiles/National/
Public/News_and_Events/Media_Release_Archive/2007-0517_projectstop.pdf> [Accessed 12 December 2007].
Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), 2004. National Drugs and Poisons Schedule Committee (online). Record of Registry, June 2004. <http://
www.tga.gov.au/ndpsc/record/rr200406r.pdf> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
United Nations Office Drug and Crime (UNODC), 2003. Synthesis by Country on Existing Amphetamine-Type Stimulants (ATS) Demand Reduction
Data Collection Sources (online). Regional Centre for East Asia and the Pacific, 13 May 2003. <http://www.apaic.org/dc/Synthesis.pdf> [Accessed 11
December 2007].
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2004. World drug report 2004 (online). UNODC, Vienna.
<http://www.unodc.org/pdf/WDR_2004/volume_1.pdf> [Accessed 11 December 2007].
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2007. Patterns and Trends of Amphetamine-Type Stimulants (ATS) and Other Drugs of Abuse in
East Asia and the Pacific 2006. UNODC Regional Centre for East Asia and the Pacific, June 2007.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2007a. World drug report 2007 (online). UNODC, Vienna.
<http://www.unodc.org/pdf/research/wdr07/WDR_2007.pdf> [Accessed 11 December 2007].
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 2006. MDMA (Ecstasy) (online). United States Department of Justice.
<http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/concern/mdma.html> [Accessed 19 December 2007].
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 2006a. Methamphetamine Factsheet (online). United States Department of Justice. <www.usdoj.
gov/dea/concern/meth.pdf> [Accessed 10 December 2007].
White, J.M., Boechner, F. and Irvine, R.J., 1997. The agony of “ecstasy” How can we avoid more “ecstasy”-related deaths? (online). Medical Journal of
Australia, 1997, vol. 166, p. 117. <http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/feb3/white/white.html> [Accessed 5 December 2007].
Amphetamine-type stimulants
35
Cannabis
Key Points
• Cannabis remains the most widely used illicit drug in Australia.
• There were 627 detections of cannabis at the border in 2006–07, 24 percent more than
the previous reporting period. However, there was a minor decrease in the weight of
cannabis detected.
• Sixty-two percent of all border detections of cannabis involved the importation of
seeds.
• In 2006–07, 69 percent of national drug arrests were for cannabis offences.
36
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Main Forms
Cannabis plants are categorised into two types: hemp and marijuana. Hemp is fibrous and low
in psychoactive components and is primarily used to produce paper, clothes and skin care
products. Cannabis sativa is the botanical name for the commonly used term, marijuana. Unlike
hemp, marijuana is high in psychoactive components and appears in various forms that are
commonly used as a drug. The main forms of cannabis and methods of administration are shown
in Table 7.
Table 7: Main forms of cannabis
Form
Description
Properties
Method of
administration
Herbal cannabis
The leaves and flowering
heads
Low levels of THC
Smoked as a rolled
cigarette or inhaled
through a water pipe or
'bong'
Cannabis resin (hashish)
Made from the resinous
material of the cannabis
plant, dried and
compressed into balls,
blocks or sheets. Colour
ranges from light brown
to black
Medium levels of THC
Crumbled and smoked in
a pipe or bong, rolled into
a cigarette with cannabis
leaf or tobacco, or cooked
with food and eaten, most
notably as 'hash cookies'
Cannabis oil
Viscous oil extracted
using a solvent such as
acetone or methanol.
Colour ranges from
amber to dark brown
High levels of THC
Small amounts applied
to cannabis or tobacco
cigarettes; can also be
heated and the vapour
inhaled
Cannabis contains more than 400 chemicals, 61 of which provide a psychoactive effect. These
psychoactive chemical components are called cannabinoids. Of the cannabinoids present in the
cannabis plant, the most powerful cannabinoid (containing hallucinogenic properties) is THC or
delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol. This cannabinoid is concentrated in the flowering heads of the
plant, with lower levels found in the leaves and stems.
CANNABIS
37
To obtain higher levels of THC, varieties of the Cannabis sativa plant have been created using
improved cultivation methods, plant selection and cloning (UNODC, 2003). Currently, there is
insufficient forensic evidence in Australia to demonstrate improvements in potency or THC levels
as a result of these methods.
Cannabis is a depressant which slows the activity of the central nervous system. The effects
of cannabis on the user are unpredictable and vary from person to person. While research
on cannabis has identified immediate and long-term effects from cannabis use, these are
dependant on the size and frequency of dosages. Immediate effects can include a sense of
relaxation, loss of inhibition, impaired coordination, affected cognitive ability, hallucinations,
anxiety and paranoia. Long-term use can cause respiratory illness (such as lung cancer and
chronic bronchitis), loss of energy and affect hormone production. Research also suggests
a causal link between cannabis and an increased risk of developing symptoms similar to
schizophrenia (AIC, 2007; DrugInfo Clearinghouse, 2007).
International trends
The cultivation of cannabis remains a global problem. In Afghanistan, an estimated 70,000
hectares of cannabis were cultivated in 2007, an increase from 50,000 hectares in 2006 (UNODC,
2007). Despite reductions in Morocco, cultivation and production of cannabis in Africa remains
widespread and continues to increase. In July 2006, 47 tonnes of cannabis herb was seized
during a joint operation between law enforcement agencies from Lesotho and South Africa
(INCB, 2006).
For the period July to December 2006, Pakistan, Spain, Malawi, Portugal, Lesotho, South Africa and
Saudi Arabia recorded total seizure weights of cannabis resin and herb in excess of one tonne each.
The combined total weight of these countries was in excess of 52 tonnes (UNODC, 2006).
The United States (US) Department of Justice has noted increased involvement in high potency
cannabis production, smuggling and distribution by Canadian-based ethnic Asian drug
trafficking organisations (NDIC, 2006; 2007).
Cannabis use (including herb and resin) remains widespread in Asia. In 2006, Indonesia ranked
cannabis as its most widely used illicit drug. Brunei, Japan, Singapore and Thailand all reported
general increases in cannabis use (UNODC, 2007a).
38
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Domestic trends
Australian border situation
While widely available overseas, cannabis importations into Australia remain economically
unattractive due to low prices and plentiful supplies from domestic cultivation.
Australian Customs Service (Customs) detections of cannabis products at the Australian border
in 2006–07 totalled 45.7 kilograms, two kilograms less than 2005‑06. There were 627 detections
of cannabis at the border in 2006–07, 24 percent more than the previous reporting period. Of the
627 detections in this reporting period, only 38 were above 100 grams, and 9 were above one
kilogram (see Figure 12).
Significant border detections
Sixty-two percent (388 out of 627) of all cannabis product detections involved seeds. These
were predominantly in small numbers intended for home cultivation, but were also occasionally
detected in quantities ranging from 100 to 500 grams. In the first half of 2007, there were four
large seizures of seeds ranging from 1 to 12 kilograms. This indicates infrequent importations for
intended large-scale cultivation.
Among the nine detections of over one kilogram, three involved attempted importation of hemp
protein nutritional supplements from the US.
Importation methods
The majority of cannabis detections at the Australian border were sent by mail or found on air
passengers and were considered to be personal use quantities. Cannabis is difficult to conceal
and with its strong odour, makes consignments vulnerable to detection.
Cannabis was detected in postal articles, air cargo parcels and the luggage of air passengers. It
was also concealed in candy, jewellery boxes and within CD and DVD covers.
CANNABIS
39
Figure 12: Country of embarkation for cannabis importations of more than 100 grams, detected
by Customs 2006–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
Weight
30
Number
14
12
25
6
10
4
Other
NZ
USA
UK
Taiwan
Czech
Republic
Philippines
Hong Kong
0
Ireland
0
Netherlands
2
China
5
Canada
Weight (kg)
8
15
Number
10
20
Country
Domestic market indicators
Cannabis remains the most widely used illicit drug in Australia. According to the 2004 National
Drug Household Survey, an estimated five million people aged 14 years and above reported
cannabis use in the previous 12 months. The report also found that approximately 34 percent
of persons (aged 14 years and over) reported cannabis use at least once in their lifetime, an
increase of 0.5 percent from 2001 (AIHW, 2005). Research on national drug treatment services
reported that cannabis was the principal illicit drug that treatment was provided for in 2005–06
(AIHW, 2007).
Cannabis use is most prevalent amongst people in their 20s and 30s. Fifty-five percent of those
aged 20 to 39 years reported cannabis use during their lives (McLaren and Mattick, 2006). A
national study found that 47 percent of persons aged under 30 reported having friends who
used cannabis. In the same study, one third of respondents indicated that cannabis use in their
peer groups was viewed as ‘unacceptable’ (NDARC, 2007).
40
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
The majority of cannabis consumed in Australia is domestically produced and remains readily
available. While detections of large outdoor bush crops continue, the most commonly detected
method of cultivating cannabis is through hydroponics or other enhanced indoor cultivation
methods. The use of hydroponics systems for cultivation enables cannabis to be grown all
year round without being exposed to conditions such as unfavorable weather or a lack of soil
nutrients, which often hamper outdoor cannabis cultivation. While the number of plants is
typically lower for hydroponic cultivation, a higher yield of ‘head’ or ‘buds’ can be produced in a
shorter period of time.
Cannabis grown hydroponically is commonly perceived to have higher levels of THC than bush
cannabis. Findings from a national study of injecting drug users show that hydroponic cannabis
continues to be perceived as ‘high’ potency and bush cannabis as ‘medium’ (Black, Stafford and
Degenhardt, 2007). The actual level of THC and the potency of cannabis in Australia is difficult to
determine due to a lack of data (Hall and Swift, 2000).
Price
The price for one ounce of cannabis (approximately 28 grams) ranged from the minimum of
$150 in New South Wales and South Australia to a maximum of $1000 in South Australia. The
price for an ounce increased in South Australia from a maximum of $200 in 2005–06, to $1000 in
2006–07. This significant price increase is specific to the Anangu-Pitjantjatjara-Yankunytjatjara
(APY) lands of South Australia. This area is Indigenous land in the far north-west of South
Australia covering 103,000 square kilometres. The remoteness of this region may impact on
cannabis availability and subsequently may have led to an increase in the maximum reported
price within this jurisdiction. The price for a pound of cannabis head decreased in Queensland
from $4000 in 2005–06 to $2800 in 2006–07.
Methods commonly referred to as hydroponics are not all truly hydroponic in nature. As defined by Section 3 of the Drugs Misuse and
Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), enhanced indoor cultivation includes nurturing the plant in nutrient enriched water as opposed to soil
(hydroponics), suspending the plant roots and spraying them with nutrient-rich solution (aeroponics) and/or the use of an artificial source of
light or heat.
CANNABIS
41
Availability
Cannabis remained widely available throughout Australia in 2006–07. A study of regular ecstasy
users described bush cannabis as being ‘very easy’ (43 percent) or ‘easy’ (35 percent) to obtain.
Comparatively, 66 percent of the same users reported hydroponic cannabis as ‘very easy’ to
obtain and 27 percent reported it is as ‘easy’ to obtain (Dunn et al., 2006).
Research on drug use amongst police detainees (incorporating surveys and urinalysis) found
cannabis to be the most commonly detected drug, with approximately 55 percent of males and
53 percent of females testing positive to cannabis use in 2006 (Mouzos et al., 2007).
Seizures and arrests
Since 2001–02, the number of seizures has remained relatively stable, while seizure weights have
fluctuated (see Figure 13). In 2006–07, New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania and the Australian
Capital Territory reported increases in the number of cannabis seizures, with increases in seizure
weights reported by New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia and Tasmania (see Table 8).
In 2006–07, 69 percent of all national drug arrests were for cannabis offences. Increases in the
number of cannabis arrests occurred in New South Wales, Western Australia, Tasmania and the
Northern Territory. The number of infringement notices for the Australian Capital Territory also
increased (see Tables 9 and 10).
42
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Figure 13: National cannabis seizures, by weight and number, 1997–98 to 2006–07
18,000
Weight (kg)
70,000
Number
16,000
60,000
14,000
Weight (kg)
10,000
40,000
8,000
30,000
6,000
Number
50,000
12,000
20,000
4,000
10,000
2,000
2006–07
2005–06
2004–05
2003–04
2002–03
2001–02
2000–01
1999–2000
1998–99
0
1997–98
0
Year
Table 8: Number, weight and percentage change of national cannabis seizures, 2005–06 and 2006–07
Number
Weight (grams)
2005–06
2006–07
% change
2005–06
2006–07
% change
NSW
8,579
10,348
20.6
869,773
1,064,913r
22.4
Vic
2,904
3,036r
4.5
1,255,358
1,572,051r
25.2
Qld
16,998
16,660r
-2.0r
852,543
653,688r
-23.3
SA
516
431
-16.5
793,303
694,183
-12.5
WA
9,215
8,987r
-2.5r
313,095
348,528r
11.2
Tas
863
2,897
235.7
40,687
188,780
364.0
NT
1,146
988
-13.8
55,662
55,202
-0.8
ACT
458
497r
8.5r
302,205
204,555r
-32.3
Total
40,679
43,844r
7.8r
4,482,626
4,781,900r
6.7
State/territory
a
a. Includes seizures by state/territory police and AFP for which a valid seizure weight was recorded.
CANNABIS
43
Table 9: Number and percentage change of national cannabis arrests, 2005–06 and 2006–07
Arrests
State/territorya
2005–06
2006–07
% change
NSW
8,842
9,906
12.0
Vic
6,901
6,836r
-1.0
Qld
23,235
22,699
-2.3
SA
1,604
1,403r
-12.6
SA (CENs)b
5,502
5,393
-2.0
WA
4,203
5,774r
37.4
WA (CINs)c
3,208
1,878
-41.5
Tas
929
1,733
86.5
NT
526
588
11.8
NT (DINs)d
481
339
-29.5
ACT
240
224
-6.7
ACT (SCONs)e
61
89
45.9
55,732
56,862r
2.0
Total
a.
b.
c. d.
e.
44
Includes arrests by state/territory police and AFP.
Cannabis Expiation Notices.
Cannabis Infringement Notices.
Drug Infringement Notices.
Simple Cannabis Offence Notices.
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Table 10: Number of national cannabis arrests, by state and territory, 2002–03 to 2006–07
State/territorya
2002–03
2003–04
2004–05
2005–06
2006–07
12,368
11,054
6583
8,842
9,906
Vic
7022
7620
7221
6,901
6,836r
Qld
19,879
22,065
23,355
23,235
22,699
SA
2028
1919
1512
1,604
1,403r
SA (CENs)b
5849
5382
4784
5,502
5,393
WA
6028
6108
5173
4,203
5,774r
nad
994d
3782
3,208
1,878
1830
1638
1353
929
1,733
257
315
429
526
588
NT (DINs)
148
300
434
481
339
ACT
196
267
228
240
224
ACT (SCONs)f
84
79
82
61
89
55,689
57,741
54,936
55,732
56,862r
NSW
WA (CINs)c
Tas
NT
e
Total
a.
b.
c. d.
e. f.
Includes arrests by state/territory police and AFP.
Cannabis Expiation Notices.
Cannabis Infringement Notices.
Introduced in April 2004, data prior to 2004–05 unavailable.
Drug Infringement Notices.
Simple Cannabis Offence Notices.
CANNABIS
45
National impact
Detections of cannabis at the border decreased in weight but increased in number, indicating
a trend of smaller cannabis importations. Over half of all border detections involved the
importation of seeds, with four of these ranging from 1 to 12 kilograms in weight. While a market
for cannabis seeds exists, large-scale international cannabis seizures are unlikely to have an
impact on the domestic market due to the abundance of available product through domestic
cultivation.
Cannabis remains the most commonly used illicit drug in Australia. In 2006–07, 69 percent of
national drug arrests were for cannabis offences. This rate has remained consistent over several
years. Prevalence rates for cannabis use continue to be highest amongst adolescents and young
adults and it is unlikely that there will be any significant decreases in the demand for cannabis
in the short-term. However, the implementation of the National Cannabis Strategy 2006–2009
may influence a reduction in cannabis use through a comprehensive and balanced approach to
supply, demand and harm reduction strategies (Commonwealth of Australia, 2006).
As noted in the ATS chapter, cannabis seizures have historically accounted for the greatest total
weight of national illicit drug seizures. However, in 2006–07, national ATS seizures accounted for
46 percent of the total seizure weight of all illicit drugs compared to cannabis with 41 percent.
This is a direct consequence of a significant law enforcement seizure of MDMA.
References
Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC), 2007. Illicit drugs and alcohol: cannabis (online). <http://www.aic.gov.au/research/drugs/types/cannabis.
html> [Accessed 6 December 2007].
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), 2005. 2004 National Drug Strategy Household Survey: Detailed Findings (online). Drug Statistics
Series 16, AIHW cat. no. PHE 66. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Canberra. <http://www.aihw.gov.au/publications/index.cfm/
title/10190> [Accessed 19 November 2007].
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), 2007. Alcohol and other drug treatment services in Australia: Report on the National Minimum
Data Set (online). Bulletin 52: July 2007. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Canberra. <http://www.aihw.gov.au/publications/index.cfm/
title/10431> [Accessed 19 November 2007].
Black, E., Stafford, J. and Degenhardt, L., 2007. An overview of the 2007 IDRS: the Injecting Drug User survey findings (online). Drug Trends Bulletin,
October 2007, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney. <http://notes.med.unsw.edu.au/NDARCWeb.
nsf/resources/Bulletins+_2007.2/$file/IDRS+BULLETIN+OCTOBER+2007.pdf> [Accessed 17 December 2007].
Commonwealth of Australia, 2006. National Cannabis Strategy 2006–2009 (online). <http://www.nationaldrugstrategy.gov.au/internet/
drugstrategy/publishing.nsf/Content/FC2EF9E5D3AE9DDDCA2571B6001C96B8/$File/cannabis-strategy.pdf> [Accessed 22 November 2007].
46
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Copeland, J., in Ross, J., 2007. Illicit drug use in Australia: Epidemiology, use patterns and associated harm (2nd Edition) (online). <http://www.
nationaldrugstrategy.gov.au/internet/drugstrategy/publishing.nsf/Content/17B917608C1969ABCA257317001A72D4/$File/mono-63.pdf>
[Accessed 30 November 2007].
DrugInfo Clearinghouse, 2006. Cannabis (online). Australian Drug Foundation. <http://www.druginfo.adf.org.au/article.asp?ContentID=cannabis>
[Accessed 7 December 2007].
Dunn, M., Degenhardt, L., Campbell, G., George, J., Johnston, J., Kinner, S., Matthews, A., Newman, J. and White, N., 2007. Australian Trends in Ecstasy
and Related Drug Markets 2006: Findings from the Ecstasy and Related Drugs Reporting System (EDRS), Monograph No. 61, National Drug and Alcohol
Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney.
Hall, W. and Swift, W., 2000. The THC Content Of Cannabis In Australia: Evidence (online). Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health,
October 2000, Vol. 24, Issue 5. <http://www.phaa.net.au/documents/17-07-07_ANZJPH_October_2000.pdf> [Accessed 30 November 2007].
International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), 2006. Analysis of the World Situation: Africa, Report of the International Narcotics Control Board for 2006
(online). <http://www.incb.org/pdf/e/ar/2006/annual-report-2006-en.pdf> [Accessed 4 December 2007].
McLaren, J. and Mattick, R.P., 2006. Cannabis in Australia: Use, supply, harms and response (online). Monograph series No. 57, National Drug and
Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney. <http://www.nationaldrugstrategy.gov.au/internet/drugstrategy/publishing.
nsf/Content/4FDE76ABD582C84ECA257314000BB6EB/$File/mono-57.pdf> [Accessed 17 December 2007].
Mouzos, J., Hind, N., Smith, L. and Adams, K., 2007. Drug use monitoring in Australia: 2006 annual report on drug use among police detainees, Research
and Public Policy Series, No. 75, Australian Institute of Criminology.
National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre (NDARC), 2007. Cannabis Acceptance up in Smoke (online). Health Report, University of New South
Wales, Sydney. <http://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/NDARCWeb.nsf/resources/PR2007_2/$file/PFIZER+CANNABIS+ATTITUDES+2007.pdf> [Accessed
17 December 2007].
National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), 2006. National Drug Threat Assessment 2007 (online). United States Department of Justice. <http://www.
usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs21/21137/21137p.pdf> [Accessed 4 December 2007].
National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), 2007. National Drug Threat Assessment 2008 (online). United States Department of Justice. <http://www.
usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs25/25921/25921p.pdf> [Accessed 17 February 2008].
O’Brien, S., Black, E., Degenhardt, L., Roxburgh, A., Campbell, G., de Graaff, B., Fetherston, J., Jenkinson, R., Kinner, S., Moon, C. and White, N., 2007.
Australian Drug Trends 2006: Findings from the Illicit Drug Reporting System (IDRS), Monograph No. 60, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre,
University of New South Wales, Sydney.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2003. Terminology and Information on Drugs (online). Second edition, Laboratory and
Scientific Division, United Nations, Vienna. <http://www.unodc.org/pdf/publications/report_2003-09-01_1.pdf> [Accessed 4 December 2007].
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2006. Bi-annual seizure report 2006/02 (online). UNODC, Vienna. <https://www.unodc.org/pdf/
publications/report_biannual_seizures_2006_2.pdf> [Accessed 4 December 2007].
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2007. Afghanistan Opium Survey 2007: Executive Summary (online). UNODC, Vienna. <http://
www.unodc.org/pdf/research/AFG07_ExSum_web.pdf> [Accessed 4 December 2007].
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2007a. Patterns and Trends of Amphetamine-Type Stimulants (ATS) and Other Drugs of Abuse in
East Asia and the Pacific 2006. UNODC Regional Centre for East Asia and the Pacific, June 2007.
CANNABIS
47
Heroin
Key Points
• The number of heroin border detections in 2006–07 is the highest on record.
• The weight of heroin detections at the border increased by 65 percent compared with
2005–06. However, it remains the third lowest weight in the last decade.
• ‘Scatter’ importations through the postal and air cargo streams continue to account for
the largest number of heroin detections.
• South-East Asia remains the primary embarkation point of heroin into Australia. India
has become a key embarkation point.
• In 2006–07, the weight of national heroin seizures increased by 192 percent.
48
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Main Forms
Heroin (diacetylmorphine) is derived from the opium poppy, Papaver somniferum. It is a highly
addictive opiate which acts as a depressant on the central nervous system and has strong pain
killing characteristics (AIC, 2007). Opium, morphine and codeine are all natural derivatives of the
opium poppy. Heroin is harvested from hardened opium gum, which is collected from scored
opium seed pods. The gum is then processed with other chemicals, such as ammonium chloride,
acetic anhydride and hydrochloric acid, to produce heroin (Interpol, 2007).
While not native to Australia, opium poppies are grown commercially in Tasmania for legitimate
pharmaceutical purposes. The Tasmanian poppy industry is highly regulated, and constitutes
more than 40 percent of the world’s legitimate supply (CSIRO, 2007; DOJ Tasmania, 2007).
Heroin is commonly administered through intravenous injection; it can also be smoked or
snorted. There are considered to be four grades of heroin. Number (No.) 4 grade which is
considered to be the purest form of heroin, is generally in the form of white powder and is either
snorted or dissolved and injected. No. 3 grade heroin is generally grey or brown and is referred
to as ‘brown rock’ or ‘brown sugar’. This is due to its granular form and resemblance to unrefined
sugar. No. 3 grade heroin is considered unsuitable for injection and is commonly heated and the
vapours inhaled (Booth, 1998). Unprocessed raw heroin or heroin base is referred to as No.1 and
No.2 grade heroin and is rarely encountered in Australia. Although heroin is sometimes graded
on the street by suppliers and users according to its colour, this is not a definitive or reliable
method of assessing its purity or origin. ‘Homebake heroin’ is a crude form of heroin which is
predominantly made from codeine-based pharmaceuticals (AIC, 2007).
HEROIN
49
International trends
In 2007, approximately 193,000 hectares of opium poppies were cultivated in Afghanistan,
representing a 17 percent increase from 2006. Afghanistan remains the primary global producer
of illicit opium. In 2007, increased cultivation and crop yields produced an unprecedented
8,200 tonnes of opium. This is equivalent to 93 percent of the world’s opium market. Continuing
the 2006 trend, approximately 70 percent of the total opium crop in 2007 was grown in the
south-western provinces of Afghanistan. The province of Hilmand alone produced 4,399 tonnes
of opium, equating to 50 percent of the total Afghan opium crop. However, the number of opium
free provinces in centre-north Afghanistan increased from 6 to 13 (UNODC, 2007).
In 2006, opium cultivation in the ‘Golden Triangle’ region in South-East Asia (which includes
Myanmar, Laos and Thailand) declined by 29 percent to 24,157 hectares. Despite this, increased
yields in Myanmar and a 14 percent decrease in overall poppy eradication ensured potential
opium production levels remained steady at 337 tonnes (UNODC, 2006). Regionally, heroin
remains widely used. In 2006, China, Malaysia, Myanmar and Vietnam ranked heroin as their most
widely used illicit drug (UNODC, 2007a). The Australian heroin market remains primarily supplied
by heroin sourced from the ‘Golden Triangle’ region.
Internationally, a number of initiatives have been implemented. A recent project has been
established which aims to counter the flow of heroin precursor chemicals into Afghanistan,
through the identification of key chemicals and entry points into Afghanistan (UNODC, 2007c). In
June 2007, senior officials from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran scheduled coordination meetings
and technical-level exchanges. These are intended to further strengthen measures designed to
combat the threat of drug trafficking along their joint borders (UNODC, 2007b). Continued global
efforts to combat the heroin trade also include the International Narcotics Control Board’s (INCB)
use of Project Cohesion, a global and multilateral initiative aimed at tracking acetic anhydride,
one of the main chemicals used in heroin synthesis (United Nations Economic and Social Council,
2007).
50
The UNODC regional project is entitled: Regional Cooperation in Precursor Chemical Control between Afghanistan and Neighboring countries
(UNODC, 2007c).
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Domestic trends
Australian border situation
The number of heroin detections at the Australian border increased from 300 in 2005–06 to 389
in 2006–07. The weight of detections increased from 45.6 kilograms in 2005–06 to 75.3 kilograms
in 2006–07. However, despite this increase, overall weight levels remain significantly lower than
those detected ten years ago (see Figure 14).
The considerable number of low-volume and high-frequency detections through the post and
air cargo indicates an increasing role of ‘scatter’ importations (see Figures 15 and 16). The large
number of heroin detections in the postal stream reflects international trends, with postal and
express mail being increasingly used to traffic drugs. The postal system provides importers
with an anonymous and low risk method of importation. South-East Asia remains the primary
point of embarkation for consignments of heroin to Australia and is expected to remain so for
the immediate future. However, changes in international production may see global trafficking
routes shift towards Afghanistan. Countries with convenient transport links to Afghanistan, such
as India, and countries in the Middle East will continue to emerge as transit points to Australia.
The continued lower weights of heroin detections compared to weights reported between
1998–99 and 2002–03 may reflect changes in the domestic market, including users increasingly
using other drugs. However, reporting from research bodies indicates that a viable market for
heroin still exists and is the preferred drug for a large proportion of injecting drug users. An
increase in the quantity of heroin imported from Afghanistan into Australia may see heroin
become more readily available to Australian users.
HEROIN
51
Figure 14: Number and weight of detections of heroin at the Australian border, 1996–97 to
2006–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
Weight
600
Number
450
400
350
400
300
250
300
200
200
Number
Weight (kg)
500
150
100
100
50
2006–07
2005–06
2004–05
2003–04
2002–03
2001–02
2000–01
1999–2000
1998–99
1997–98
0
1996–97
0
Year
Figure 15: Number of detections of heroin at the Australian border, as a proportion of total
detections, by method of importation, 2006–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
Air Cargo (18.3%)
Air Passenger/Crew (10.8%)
Parcels Post (71%)
52
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Figure 16: Weight of detections of heroin at the Australian border, as a proportion of total weight,
by method of importation, 2006–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
Air Cargo (29.8%)
Air Passenger/Crew (39.2%)
Parcels Post (31%)
Significant border detections
Significant border detections of heroin in 2006–07 included:
• 5.2 kilograms of heroin was detected on 25 July 2006 in the luggage of an air passenger
returning from the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) of China to Sydney.
• 4 kilograms of heroin was detected on 1 July 2006 concealed in luggage carried by an air
passenger from Malaysia to Perth.
• 2.9 kilograms of heroin was detected on 23 September 2006, concealed in coffee in the
luggage of an air passenger who travelled from Cambodia via Malaysia to Melbourne.
• 2.2 kilograms of heroin was detected in a passenger’s luggage returning from Vietnam to
Sydney on 6 October 2006.
HEROIN
53
Importation methods
The most prominent methods of heroin importation in 2006–07 were air passengers (luggage
and body), air cargo (air cargo parcels) and postal articles. Methods of concealment included
greeting cards, shoe polish, food, shoes, clothing and impregnation in paper.
The emergence of West African criminal (WAC) networks in India may have assisted it in
becoming a key embarkation point for heroin. WAC networks are becoming increasingly
established in Asia and Australia, resulting in the facilitation of illicit drug shipments and
associated criminal activities.
World Customs Organization (WCO) and United Nations (UN) reporting shows that, between
2003 and 2006, shipments of heroin originating in India increased dramatically. Bangladesh,
Sri Lanka, South Africa, the Netherlands and Canada were the main destination countries for
these shipments. The WCO predicts that India and Iran will become more prominent departure
countries for heroin trafficking. However, direct importation to Australia from Iran is considered
unlikely due to limited trade and indirect travel links between the two countries.
Embarkation points
Identified embarkation points for shipments of heroin over 100 grams were, in order of weight,
India, Vietnam, Malaysia, Thailand, Moldova, Cambodia, China, Pakistan, Nigeria, Afghanistan, the
United Arab Emirates (UAE), Hong Kong SAR of China, Turkey, Laos, Singapore, Benin, South Africa,
the United Kingdom (UK), Lebanon, Macao, Spain, Nepal, Uganda, Ivory Coast and Kyrgyzstan.
While the majority of larger shipments were still sourced from South-East Asia, attempts have
been made to import suspected South-West Asian (mainly Afghan) heroin to Australia. These
attempts have originated from countries such as India, Nigeria, Turkey, Pakistan, Kyrgyzstan and
the UAE.
India was both the source country for the majority of detections and for larger detections
over 100 grams. In 2006–07, 52 of the 78 detections from India were over 100 grams. This
demonstrates a noticeable difference from 2005–06 when only 36 of 220 detections were over
100 grams. The majority of small ‘scatter’ type importations originated from Malaysia. Forty-one
of the 43 detections originating from this country were less than 100 grams and were imported
through the postal stream.
54
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Domestic market indicators
A national study found that heroin remains the most commonly reported drug of choice among
injecting drug users in 2007. The percentage of respondents reporting heroin as their drug of
choice increased from 48 percent in 2006 to 52 percent in 2007 (Black, Stafford and Degenhardt,
2007; O’Brien et al., 2007). The overall prevalence and frequency of heroin use increased in 2007
when compared to the previous year (Black, Stafford and Degenhardt, 2007).
Research indicates that heroin users regularly use benzodiazepines as a supplement to heroin
when availability is low. This is consistent with a 2006 study of injecting drug users, which
indicated an increase in benzodiazepine use in most jurisdictions and a concurrent decrease
in heroin use (O’Brien et al., 2007). Recent injecting drug user survey results indicate that this
decline may be temporary, with a recent reported increase in heroin use in 2007 (Black, Stafford
and Degenhardt, 2007).
Clandestine laboratory detections for ‘homebake heroin’ increased from four in 2005–06 to
nine in 2006–07. However, in comparison to the high number of laboratory detections for
amphetamine-type stimulants, the illicit conversion of pharmaceuticals into heroin does not
appear to be widespread. Increases in laboratory detections may be observed if pharmaceuticals,
such as oxycodone, morphine or hydromorphine, become more available.
Price
In Victoria, the price of one gram of heroin increased from a starting price of $270 in 2005–06
to $370 in 2006–07. Similarly in Victoria, the price range of a cap of heroin also increased
significantly from $30–$50 in 2005–06 to $50–$200 in 2006–07. The price of heroin remained
stable in all other jurisdictions.
Purity
Figure 17 shows median purity of heroin samples forensically analysed since 2002. An overall
decrease in heroin purity levels have been observed since 2004. The median purity level of
heroin in Australia ranged from 5 percent to 52.6 percent in 2006–07. In the second quarter of
2007, significant increases in purity levels were noted in New South Wales and South Australia.
HEROIN
55
Figure 17: Median purity of heroin samples, 2001–02 to 2006–07
80
NSW
70
VIC
QLD
SA
WA
ACT
60
Purity (%)
50
40
30
20
10
q2 2007
q1 2007
q4 2006
q3 2006
q2 2006
q1 2006
q4 2005
q3 2005
q2 2005
q1 2005
q4 2004
q3 2004
q2 2004
q1 2004
q4 2003
q3 2003
q2 2003
q1 2003
q4 2002
q3 2002
0
Quarter
Availability
A national study of injecting drug users in 2006 reported that 71 percent of users perceived
heroin to be ‘easy’ or ‘very easy’ to obtain (O’Brien et al., 2007). This is a decrease from the
preceding year, where 83 percent of users reported heroin to be ‘easy’ or ‘very easy’ to obtain
(Stafford et al., 2006).
Seizures and arrests
In 2006–07, the number of heroin seizures increased slightly compared to 2005–06 (see
Figure 18). The total weight of national heroin seizures increased by 192 percent but remain
significantly lower than seizure weights reported in the peak period. The number of seizures
increased in all states and territories except for South Australia, Tasmania and the Australian
Capital Territory (see Table 11). Nationally, there was a slight decrease in the number of arrests
(see Table 12). Western Australia reported the highest percentage increase in heroin arrests since
2005–06 (37 percent).
56
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Figure 18: National heroin seizures, by weight and number, 1997–98 to 2006–07
800
Weight (kg)
10000
Number
9000
700
8000
7000
500
6000
400
5000
300
4000
Number
Weight (kg)
600
3000
200
2000
100
1000
2006–07
2005–06
2004–05
2003–04
2002–03
2001–02
2000–01
1999–2000
1998–99
0
1997–98
0
Year
Table 11: Number, weight and percentage change of national heroin seizures, 2005–06 and 2006–07
Number
State/territorya
Weight (grams)
2005–06
2006–07
% change
2005–06
2006–07
% change
NSW
745
833r
11.8r
16,294
58,738r
260.5r
Vic
159
188
18.2
3,264
14,387
340.8
Qld
174
220
26.4
3,183
6,767
112.6
SA
62
26
-58.1
2,914
953
-67.3
WA
128
186
45.3
3,833
5,297
38.2
Tas
1
0
-100.0
2
0
-100.0
NT
1
2
100.0
2
1
-50.0
ACT
28
21
-25.0
39
42
7.7
Total
1298
1476r
13.7r
29,531
86,185
191.8r
a. Includes seizures by state/territory police and AFP for which a valid seizure weight was recorded.
HEROIN
57
Table 12: Number and percentage change of national heroin arrests, 2005–06 and 2006–07
Arrests
State/territorya
2005–06
2006–07
% change
NSW
633
567r
-10.4r
Vic
1159
1070r
-7.7r
Qld
255
290
13.7
SA
50
50
0.0
WA
108
148r
37.0r
Tas
16
16
0.0
NT
0
1
-
ACT
28
22
-21.4
Total
2249
2164r
-3.8r
a. Includes arrests by state/territory police and AFP.
National impact
While there has been a recent reported decrease in illicit opium production in South‑East Asia,
illicit opium production has increased in Afghanistan. As a result, changes in international opium
production may see global trafficking routes shift towards Afghanistan. Despite this, South-East
Asia has remained the primary embarkation point for heroin imported to Australia for the 2006–07
reporting period.
In 2006–07, India was a dominant embarkation point for heroin to Australia. With the continued
influence of West African criminal networks in India, it is likely to remain a key embarkation point.
Other countries with transport links to Afghanistan, such as those in the Middle East region, may
emerge as key embarkation points for heroin.
Heroin detections at the Australian border continued to increase in 2006–07. The weight of
detections at the border have also increased since the previous reporting period. Detection
numbers and weights remain significantly lower than levels detected 10 years ago. ‘Scatter’
importations of heroin in the postal and air cargo streams continue to be the most frequently
detected method of importation.
58
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
In 2006–07, the weight of national heroin seizures increased by 192 percent, while the number of seizures
increased by 14 percent. There was a four percent decrease in the number of national heroin arrests.
Overall, the increase in border detections, national seizure weight and numbers are potential
indicators of an increased demand for heroin. Trends in user reporting show that use of heroin
has also increased and it is considered easily available. This indicates that there is an established
market for heroin in Australia. It is unlikely that overall levels of heroin use will increase
significantly or return to previously observed peak levels in the near future.
References
Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) 2007. Illicit drugs and alcohol: heroin (online). <http://www.aic.gov.au/research/drugs/types/heroin.htm>
[Accessed 6 December 2007].
Black, E., Stafford, J. and Degenhardt, L., 2007. An overview of the 2007 IDRS: the Injecting Drug User survey findings. Drug Trends Bulletin, October,
Sydney: National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales.
Booth, M., 1998. Opium: A History, Saint Martins Press, New York.
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), 2007. Poppies: pharmaceutical development (online). <http://www.csiro.
au/science/psi3.html> [Accessed 28 November 2007].
Department of Justice Tasmania (DOJ), 2007. Types of poppies and how to identify them (online). Poppy Advisory and Control Board. <http://www.
justice.tas.gov.au/poppy/dangers_of_poppies/types_of_poppies_and_how_to_identify_them> [Accessed 21 November 2007].
Interpol, 2007. Heroin (online). <http://www.interpol.int/Public/Drugs/heroin/default.asp> [Accessed 19 November 2007].
NSW Department of Health, 2006. Heroin Drug Facts, NSW Department of Health (online). July. <http://www.health.nsw.gov.au/public-health/dpb/
publications/pdf/factsheets/heroin.pdf> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
O’Brien, S., Black, E., Degenhardt, L., Roxburgh, A., Campbell, G., de Graaff, B., Fetherston, J., Jenkinson, R., Kinner, S., Moon, C. and White, N., 2007.
Australian Drug Trends 2006: Findings from the Illicit Drug Reporting System (IDRS), Monograph No. 60, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre,
University of New South Wales, Sydney.
Stafford, J., Degenhardt, L., Black, E., Bruno, R., Buckingham, K., Fetherston, J., Jenkinson, R., Kinner, S., Newman, J. and Weekley, J., 2006. Australian
drug trends 2005: Findings from the Illicit Drug Reporting System (IDRS), Monograph No.59. National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre (NDARC),
Sydney.
United Nations Economic and Social Council, 2007. Report on the fiftieth Session, Commission on Narcotic Drugs (online). UNODC, Vienna. <http://
daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/V07/819/36/PDF/V0781936.pdf?OpenElement> [Accessed 22 January 2008].
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2006. Opium Poppy Cultivation in the Golden Triangle: Lao PDR, Myanmar, Thailand (online).
October 2006, UNODC, Vienna. <http://www.unodc.org/pdf/research/Golden_triangle_2006.pdf> [Accessed 4 December 2007].
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2007. Afghanistan 2007 Annual Opium Poppy Survey: Executive Summary (online). UNODC,
Vienna. <http://www.unodc.org/pdf/research/AFG07_ExSum_web.pdf> [Accessed 6 December 2007].
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2007a. Patterns and Trends of Amphetamine-Type Stimulants (ATS) and Other Drugs of Abuse in
East Asia and the Pacific 2006, UNODC Regional Centre for East Asia and the Pacific, June 2007.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2007b. Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan agree to strengthen counter-narcotics cooperation – press
release (online). UNODC, Vienna. <http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/press/releases/2007-06-12.html> [Accessed 6 December 2007].
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2007c. Afghanistan: Counter Narcotics Law Enforcement (online). UNODC Country Office for
Afghanistan, Kabul. Update #6, March 2007. <http://www.unodc.org/pdf/afg/updates/cnle_update_06.pdf> [Accessed 6 December 2007].
HEROIN
59
Cocaine
Key Points
• The total weight of cocaine detected at the border in 2006–07 increased by over 600
percent. However, it is still lower than the peak detected weight recorded in 2001–02.
• More than half of the total weight of cocaine detected at the Australian border occurred
in sea cargo shipments.
• ‘Scatter’ importations of cocaine in the postal stream continue to be the most frequently
detected method of importation.
• The total weight of cocaine seized nationally increased by approximately 1300 percent
compared with 2005–06. The number of seizures increased by 70 percent.
• In 2006–07, national cocaine arrests increased by over 75 percent.
60
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Main Forms
Cocaine is a crystalline alkaloid powder produced from material found in the leaves of the
Erythroxylon coca plant, which is indigenous to South America (DEA, 2006).
Cocaine has similar qualities to amphetamine and is the most powerful stimulant derived from
a natural source (ONDCP, 2006). Historically, cocaine has been used in its pure chemical form,
cocaine hydrochloride. Previously used in medicine as a local anaesthetic, especially for the eyes,
nose and throat, cocaine is now widely used illicitly for its euphoric and stimulating effects. As a
central nervous stimulant, cocaine interferes with brain function, while releasing excessive levels
of dopamine (DEA, 2006).
While cocaine powder is most commonly inhaled into the nasal passages, it can also be injected,
smoked or ingested. When cocaine is consumed with alcohol, the human liver manufactures a
chemical called cocaethylene. This intensifies the euphoric effect, but increases the risk of sudden
death (NIDA, 2006).
‘Crack’ is a freebase, smokeable form of cocaine. It is produced by processing cocaine
hydrochloride with ammonia or sodium bicarbonate and water, which is then heated to remove
the hydrochloride base. The name ‘crack’ refers to the crackling sound that occurs when the rock
is heated and smoked (NIDA, 2005). ‘Crack’ cocaine is most prevalent in North America and is not
frequently encountered in Australia (UNODC, 2007).
International trends
The overall production of cocaine remained relatively stable at an estimated 984 metric tonnes
in 2006. A reduction in Colombian coca production in 2006 was offset by an increase in both
Bolivia and Peru. Despite the decrease, Columbia continues its dominance as the leading supplier
to the global cocaine market. In 2006, the combined illicit cultivation of coca bush for Bolivia,
Colombia and Peru remained static at 156,900 hectares (UNODC, 2007a).
In 2006–07, South American and international law enforcement agencies recorded significant
seizures of cocaine. This included a single Colombian detection of 27 tonnes in 2007. However,
increased detections have not significantly affected global supplies as syndicates remain
adaptive to law enforcement operations. Colombian syndicates have continued to use West
COCAINE
61
African countries as transhipment points for the movement of multi-tonne quantities of
cocaine to Spain and Portugal for distribution in European markets. There is a continued trend
of detections in countries such as China, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) of
China, Cambodia and India, where cocaine has not, historically, been a drug of concern.
In Columbia, 2,157 cocaine processing laboratories were destroyed in 2006. This is an increase
of approximately 10 percent from 2005. In Peru, 684 cocaine processing laboratories were
destroyed in 2006. Statistics are not available for the preceding year (BINLEA, 2007).
After cannabis, cocaine remains one of the most frequently used illicit drugs in European
countries. Research indicates that the prevalence of cocaine use over any other illicit drug use is
highest amongst persons aged 15 to 34 years. An estimated 7.5 million people in this age group
have reported using cocaine at least once in their lifetime (EMCDDA, 2007).
There have also been an increasing number of reports of drug users in Europe using both heroin
and cocaine simultaneously, known amongst user groups as ‘speed-balling’ (EMCDDA, 2007a).
In such cases, cocaine is often used in order to reduce the withdrawal effects of heroin or to
enhance feelings of euphoria (EMCDDA, 2007).
Domestic trends
Australian border situation
In 2006–07, cocaine detections at the Australian border rose significantly in weight and remained
relatively constant in number when compared to 2005–06.
In 2006–07, 609.9 kilograms of cocaine was detected in comparison to a total of 83 kilograms in
2005–06, an increase of 635 percent. The weight detected in 2006–07 is significantly larger than those
detected from 2002–03 to 2005–06, however remains lower than the peak weight in 2001–02. The
number of detections decreased slightly from 376 in 2005–06 to 366 in 2006–07 (see Figure 19).
The increase in weight comes as a result of large detections in sea and air cargo. This included
three detections over 100 kilograms, two in sea cargo and one in air cargo during 2006–07.
Six kilograms was the maximum weight detected in the previous reporting period. Cocaine
imported via air passenger couriers and through ‘scatter importation’ methodologies (highfrequency but low-volume quantities) continues to be regularly detected (see Figures 20 and 21).
62
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Figure 19: Number and weight of detections of cocaine at the Australian border, 1996–97 to
2006–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
1200
Weight
Number
700
600
500
800
400
600
300
400
Number
Weight (kg)
1000
200
200
100
2006–07
2005–06
2004–05
2003–04
2002–03
2001–02
2000–01
1999–2000
1998–99
1997–98
0
1996–97
0
Year
Figure 20: Number of detections of cocaine at the Australian border, as a proportion of total
detections, by method of importation, 2006–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
Air Cargo (16.9%)
Air Passenger/Crew (6.3%)
Parcels Post (75.7%)
Sea Cargo (1.1%)
COCAINE
63
Figure 21: Weight of detections of cocaine at the Australian border, as a proportion of total
weight, by method of importation, 2006–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
Air Cargo (33.5%)
Air Passenger/Crew (4.8%)
Parcels Post (4.3%)
Sea Cargo (57.4%)
Significant border detections
Significant border detections of cocaine in 2006–07 included:
• 141 kilograms of cocaine originating from Chile was detected in air cargo, sent from Hong
Kong SAR of China to Sydney on 15 March 2007.
• 135 kilograms of cocaine was detected in a sea cargo consignment from Canada to Brisbane
on 08 September 2006.
• 35 kilograms of cocaine powder was detected in sea cargo from Mexico to Sydney on 15 May
2007.
• 10.9 kilograms of cocaine powder was detected on 19 October 2006, sent by air cargo from
Guyana to Sydney.
• 10 kilograms of cocaine was detected in a truck brake drum in air cargo, sent from the United
States of America (US) to Sydney on 16 May 2007.
64
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Importation methods
Unlike 2005–06, there were detections of sea cargo importation of cocaine in 2006‑07. The
total weight of cocaine importations through sea cargo was 350 kilograms. A total of 204.2
kilograms of cocaine was detected via air cargo, 29.6 kilograms detected in the possession of air
passengers, and 26 kilograms in postal articles. There were 30 detections of cocaine weighing
over one kilogram (13 were detected in air cargo, 10 with air passengers, 4 in postal articles and 3
in sea cargo).
While Colombia has decreased coca production, this has been offset by increased cultivation in
Bolivia and Peru. This changing dynamic could have a number of effects, such as the potential for
new criminal networks to become established in Australia.
Canada has emerged as a transit point for cocaine entering Australia. In 2006–07, there was an
increase in seizures at the Australian border from Canada through syndicates that previously
imported MDMA or methylamphetamine. International reporting shows that increasing amounts
of cocaine are being seized in Asia, particularly China and India.
In 2006–07, West African organised crime networks continued to be involved in the importation
of cocaine into Australia via the postal, air cargo and passenger streams.
Embarkation points
Embarkation points of significant attempted cocaine importations (an aggregate detected
weight of cocaine of at least one kilogram) in 2006–07 were, in weight order, Chile, Canada,
Hong Kong SAR of China, Mexico, the US, Argentina, Brazil, Guyana, Thailand, Costa Rica, Nigeria,
Colombia, China, the United Arab Emirates, Peru, Germany and Venezuela.
Domestic market indicators
According to the 2004 National Drug Household Survey, the rate of reported recent cocaine use
(in the last 12 months) was low and stable at one percent. Lifetime use of cocaine also remained
moderately low at approximately five percent (AIHW, 2005). Research on drug use amongst
police detainees (incorporating surveys and urinalysis) in 2006 found only two percent tested
positive to cocaine (Mouzos et al., 2007).
COCAINE
65
In Australia, injecting cocaine users were reported to also use heroin, cannabis, and
benzodiazepines (Kaye, 2007). Similar to trends in European countries, cocaine users in Australia
are also known to ‘speed-ball’ (EMCDDA, 2007). Non-injecting cocaine users were reported to use
methylamphetamine, cannabis and ecstasy (Kaye, 2007).
Generally it is believed that the majority of Australian cocaine users are from a section of the
population who rarely come to the attention of law enforcement agencies, making it difficult to
define the dynamics of the Australian cocaine market. As stated by Campbell (2001), this user
group includes:
• ‘culturally influenced’ users for whom cocaine symbolises success;
• action-oriented success seekers who use the drug for coping with variations of success;
• young people of high socio-economic status for parties and social occasions; and
• risk takers and stimulus seekers.
However, a study examining the characteristics and dynamics of cocaine supply and demand
in Sydney and Melbourne identified two distinct groups of cocaine users. While the first group
have similar traits to those described above, the second group of economically and socially
marginalised users, primarily located in Sydney, appear to be the highest users of cocaine in
Australia. This second group typically inject cocaine, often in conjunction with heroin and fund
their use through government benefits, sex work and drug dealing (Shearer et al., 2005). This
finding is supported by another study which reported higher levels of unemployment and lower
levels of education to be prevalent among cocaine injectors (Kaye, 2007).
Price
In 2006–07, cocaine was cheapest in New South Wales and South Australia, with prices starting
from $200 per gram. Both jurisdictions reported decreases in the starting price per gram from
2005–06, with New South Wales decreasing from $350 and South Australia from $250. The
starting price per gram in Victoria also decreased from $350 to $300. Western Australia reported
the highest upper level price of $500 per gram, an increase of $150 per gram from 2005–06.
66
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Purity
Figure 22 illustrates the fluctuations in cocaine purity analysed in Australia since 2002. Due
to the infrequency of seizures analysed in some jurisdictions, only New South Wales, Victoria,
Queensland and Western Australia are shown in the chart. During this reporting period, median
purity levels ranged from 28.5 to 90 percent. Western Australia reported the highest purity levels
during the fourth quarter of 2006, at 90 percent. The spike in purity in Western Australia is the
result of analysis of one sample only and may not be indicative of general purity in the state
during that quarter.
Figure 22: Median purity of cocaine samples, 2002–03 to 2006–07
100
NSW
90
VIC
QLD
WA
80
Purity (%)
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
q2 2007
q1 2007
q4 2006
q3 2006
q2 2006
q1 2006
q4 2005
q3 2005
q2 2005
q1 2005
q4 2004
q3 2004
q2 2004
q1 2004
q4 2003
q3 2003
q2 2003
q1 2003
q4 2002
q3 2002
0
Quarter
Availability
According to a national study of injecting drug users in 2006, there was a lack of data from most
jurisdictions on the availability of cocaine. Of the responses obtained, users were primarily from
New South Wales. Within New South Wales, 71 percent of respondents described cocaine as ‘easy’
or ‘very easy’ to obtain (O’Brien et al., 2007). In a national study of regular ecstasy users, only 28
percent reported cocaine as ‘easy’ to obtain, with 41 percent reporting it to be ‘difficult’ to obtain
(Dunn et al., 2007).
COCAINE
67
Seizures and arrests
Nationally, the number and weight of cocaine seizures in Australia increased dramatically
compared with 2005-06. There was a 70 percent increase in the number of seizures. The weight
of cocaine seizures increased by approximately 1,300 percent but remained lower than seizure
weights reported in 2001–02 (see Figure 23).
The most significant weight increases in cocaine seizures occurred in Queensland and New
South Wales (see Table 13). Cocaine seizures in New South Wales accounted for nearly 75
percent of the national total, up from 37.5 kilograms in 2005–06 to 481.1 kilograms in 2006–07.
Queensland experienced the largest percentage increase in seizure weight, up from 942 grams
in 2005–06 to 161.1 kilograms in 2006–07. Western Australia, Tasmania and the Australian Capital
Territory reported minor increases in the number of cocaine seizures.
Figure 23: National cocaine seizures, by weight and number, 1997–98 to 2006–07
Weight (kg)
1200
Number
1400
1200
1000
800
800
600
600
400
400
200
200
Year
68
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
2006–07
2005–06
2004–05
2003–04
2002–03
2001–02
2000–01
1999–2000
1998–99
0
1997–98
0
Number
Weight (kg)
1000
Table 13: Number, weight and percentage change of national cocaine seizures, 2005–­06 and 2006­–07
Number
State/territorya
Weight (grams)
2005–06
2006–07
% change
2005–06
2006–07
% change
NSW
507
920r
81.5r
37,452
481,060r
1184.5r
Vic
51
48r
-5.9r
3,698
4,196r
13.5r
Qld
79
153r
93.7r
942
161,081r
16999.9
SA
16
10
-37.5
2,425
80
-96.7
WA
33
39r
18.2r
1,513
187r
-87.6r
Tas
1
2
100.0
1
7
600.0
NT
3
3
0.0
5
26
420.0
ACT
7
9r
28.6r
26
1
-96.2
Total
697
1,184r
69.9r
46,062
646,638r
1303.8r
a. Includes seizures by state/territory police and AFP for which a valid seizure weight was recorded.
Table 14: Number and percentage change of national cocaine arrests, 2005–06 and 2006–07
Arrests
State/ territorya
2005–06
2006–07
% change
NSW
208
367r
76.4r
Vic
98
127
29.6
Qld
67
143r
113.4r
SA
14
11
-21.4
WA
3
42
1300.0
Tas
0
1
-
NT
1
1
0.0
ACT
5
7
40.0
Total
396
699r
76.5r
a. Includes arrests by state/territory police and AFP.
COCAINE
69
Nationally, cocaine arrests increased by 77 percent compared to the previous reporting period.
The majority of cocaine arrests occurred in New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland. The
number of cocaine arrests increased in all jurisdictions with the exception of South Australia
and the Northern Territory. The most notable increases in cocaine arrests occurred in New South
Wales (76 percent), Queensland (113 percent) and Western Australia (1,300 percent) (see Table
14). Care should be exercised in comparing arrests in all states and territories due to the small
number of arrests in some jurisdictions.
National impact
The total weight of cocaine detected at the border increased from 83 kilograms in 2005–06 to
609.9 kilograms in 2006–07, an increase of 635 percent. However, this is still lower than figures
reported in 2001–02.
While Canada remains a key embarkation point for cocaine importations to Australia, a number
of countries including Nigeria and Germany have emerged as embarkation points. Canadian
organised crime groups, who were previously involved in MDMA or methylamphetamine
importation, have also been linked to an increase in cocaine detections.
‘Scatter’ importations of cocaine in the postal stream continue to be the most frequently
detected method of importation. More than half of the total weight of cocaine detected at the
Australian border occurred in sea cargo shipments. This is a significant shift in methodology from
the previous year where there were no detections of importations via sea cargo shipments.
Border detections of cocaine suggest that Sydney remains the major point of entry into Australia.
In 2006–07, a large sea cargo detection occurred in Queensland, which may indicate a change in
established trafficking routes.
The total weight of cocaine seized nationally in 2006–07 increased by approximately 1,300 percent.
Compared to 2005–06, the number of national cocaine seizures increased by 70 percent and cocaine
arrests increased by 77 percent. The most notable increases in arrests occurred in New South Wales,
Queensland and Western Australia. New South Wales and Queensland also experienced the largest
increases in percentage and weight of seizures and the largest single detections of cocaine at the
border. While New South Wales is likely to remain the predominant point of entry for cocaine into
Australia, these figures indicate Queensland is developing as a prominent entry point.
70
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
References
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), 2005. 2004 National Drug Strategy Household Survey – detailed findings (online). Drug Statistics
Series, No. 16, Canberra. <http://www.aihw.gov.au/publications/index.cfm/title/10190> [Accessed 12 December 2007].
Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (BINLEA), 2007. International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (online). United
States Department of State, Vol 1, March 2007. <http://www.state.gov/p/inl/rls/nrcrpt/2007/vol1/html/80855.htm> [Accessed 7December 2007].
Campbell, A., 2001. The Australian illicit drug guide. Black Inc., Melbourne.
DEA see U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.
Dunn, M., Degenhardt, L., Campbell, G., George, J., Johnston, J., Kinner, S., Matthews, A., Newman, J., and White, N., 2007. Australian Trends in Ecstasy
and Related Drug Markets 2006: Findings from the Ecstasy and Related Drugs Reporting System (EDRS), Monograph No. 61, National Drug and Alcohol
Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney.
European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), 2007. Cocaine and Crack Cocaine: A Growing Public Health Issue (online).
Lisbon. <http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/selected-issues/cocaine> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA), 2007a. Annual Report 2007: the state of the drugs problem in Europe (online).
Lisbon. <http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm/att_42156_EN_TDAC07001ENC.pdf> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
Kaye, S., 2007. Illicit drug use in Australia: Epidemiology, use patterns and associated harm (online). 2nd Edition, National Drug and Alcohol Research
Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney. <http://www.nationaldrugstrategy.gov.au/internet/drugstrategy/publishing.nsf/Content/
17B917608C1969ABCA257317001A72D4/$File/mono-63.pdf> [Accessed 20 November 2007].
Mouzos, J., Hind, N., Smith, L., and Adams, K., 2007. Drug use monitoring in Australia: 2006 annual report on drug use among police detainees (online).
Research and Public Policy Series, No. 75, Australian Institute of Criminology. <http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/rpp/75/rpp75.pdf> [Accessed
20 November 2007].
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), 2005. Research Report Series - Cocaine Abuse and Addiction (online). National Institutes of Health. <http://
www.nida.nih.gov/researchreports/Cocaine/cocaine2.html#crack> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), 2006. NIDA InfoFacts: Crack and Cocaine (online). National Institutes of Health. <http://www.drugabuse.
gov/infofacts/cocaine.html> [Accessed 20 November 2007].
O’Brien, S., Black, E., Degenhardt, L., Roxburgh, A., Campbell, G., de Graaff, B., Fetherston, J., Jenkinson, R., Kinner, S., Moon, C., White, N., 2007.
Australian Drug Trends 2006: Findings from the Illicit Drug Reporting System (IDRS), Monograph No. 60, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre,
University of New South Wales, Sydney.
Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), 2006. Drug facts: Cocaine (online). Executive Office of the President of the United States. <http://
www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/drugfact/cocaine/index.html> [Accessed 10 December 2007].
Shearer, J., Jonston, J., Kaye, S., Dillon, P. and Collins, L., 2005. Characteristics and dynamics of cocaine supply and demand in Sydney and Melbourne
(online). Monograph Series No. 14, National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund, Adelaide. <http://www.ndlerf.gov.au/pub/Cocaine_Sydney_
Melbourne_Full.pdf> [Accessed 20 November 2007].
United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2007. World Drug Report 2007 (online). UNODC, Vienna.
<http://www.unodc.org/pdf/research/wdr07/WDR_2007.pdf> [Accessed 20 November 2007].
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2007a. Coca cultivation in the Andean region: A survey of Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru
(online). UNODC, Vienna. <http://www.unodc.org/pdf/andean/Andean_report_2007.pdf> [Accessed 4 December 2007].
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 2006. Cocaine (online). United States Department of Justice.
<http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/concern/cocaine.html> [Accessed 20 November 2007].
COCAINE
71
Other Drugs
Key Points
• In 2006–07, the number of border detections of anabolic agents and other selected
hormones was the highest since the peak in 2001–02.
• The maximum individual weight of a ketamine border detection increased from 500
grams in 2005–06 to 10 kilograms in 2006–07.
• Nationally, there was a 63 percent increase in the weight of steroid seizures and a 57
percent increase in the number of seizures compared with 2005–06.
• In 2006–07, the weight of national tryptamine seizures was at its lowest since 1997–98.
72
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Anabolic agents and selected hormones
Main forms
The Australian Standard Classification of Drugs of Concern categorises anabolic agents and
selected hormones as encompassing anabolic and androgenic steroids (AAS), beta 2 agonists,
peptide hormones, mimetics, analogues, other anabolic agents and selected hormones (ABS,
2000). This section will cover these drug types only. These drug types are sometimes categorised
as Performance and Image Enhancing Drugs (PIEDs) (Larance and Degenhardt, 2007).
Anabolic agents
There are two main types of anabolic agents; these are AAS and beta-2 agonists. AAS are
derivatives of the male sex hormone testosterone. The anabolic effects of AAS assist the body
in retaining protein, which in turn, increases muscle mass. The androgenic effects of AAS are
involved in the development and maintenance of male sex characteristics (Peters et al., 1997).
AAS are commonly used in treating Acquired Immune System Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS)
patients and in the treatment of other diseases which involve a loss of lean muscle mass (NIDA,
2007). AAS are also used in veterinary treatments (Larance and Degenhardt, 2007).
However, AAS have been diverted from medical or veterinary treatment for other purposes, such
as image and sports-performance enhancement. Recent studies indicate that AAS is increasingly
being used in conjunction with other PIEDs, such as anti‑oestrogens, stimulants and insulin (Larance
and Degenhardt, 2007). Athletes have been known to administer 100 times the therapeutic dose
of steroids (Sports Medicine Australia, n.d.). Both AAS and beta-2 agonists are currently prohibited
‘in‑competition’ as well as ‘out-of-competition’ under the World Anti-Doping Code Prohibited List 2007.
Examples of prohibited AAS include, but are not limited to, androstenedione, boldenone, nandrolone,
dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), stanozolol and testosterone (ASADA, 2007).
Side effects of AAS use include liver damage, heart problems, depression and increased levels of
aggression (Sports Medicine Australia, n.d.; Larance and Degenhardt, 2007). In some cases, steroid use
has been reported to cause death (Sports Medicine Australia, n.d.; Dollman and Henry-Edwards, 2005).
OTHER DRUGS
73
In their aerosol form, beta-2 agonists are commonly used in the treatment of asthma. However,
when injected or taken in tablet form, it may increase muscle mass and reduce body fat (ASADA,
2007a; Sports Medicine Australia, n.d). While beta-2 agonists are currently prohibited by sporting
authorities ‘in-competition’ as well as ‘out-of-competition’, there may be exceptions in use. In
Australia, inhaled beta-2 agonists may be exempt if an abbreviated therapeutic use exemption
(ATUE) is obtained (ASADA, 2007a). Anabolic agents commonly used in Australia are outlined in
Table 15.
Table 15: Anabolic agents commonly used in Australia
Drug name
Potential effects
Brand name
Forms
AAS – Anabolic
Used to increase muscle
mass through increased
retention of protein
Deca-durabolin, Anadrol50, Oxandrin
Ampoule, vial,
pre-packed syringe,
tablet
AAS - Androgenic
Used to increase muscle
mass by increasing male
sex hormone levels
Depo-testosterone,
Sustanon, Androil
Testocaps
Vial, ampoules,
pre-packed syringe,
capsules
Beta-2 agonists
Commonly used to treat
asthma; however, when
taken into the bloodstream increase muscle
mass by mimicking the
effects of adrenaline and
non-adrenaline
Bricanyl, Ventolin
Ampoules, rotacaps,
inhaler, nebuliser, tablet
Peptide hormones, mimetics and analogues
Peptide hormones, including human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG), human growth hormone
(HGH) and corticotrophin (ACTH, tetracosactide), are naturally occurring chemicals in the body
and are used for a variety of purposes (ONDCP, 2005). As an example, HGH may be used to
produce anabolic effects, reduce muscle cell breakdown and reduce body fat (ASADA, 2007b).
A mimetic displays similar pharmacological effects to another substance, regardless of the
chemical structure. Analogues are derived from the modification or alteration of the chemical
structure of another substance while retaining similar pharmacological effects. Peptide
hormones, mimetics and analogues are likely to be used by athletes for a number of effects, such
as acting as anti-inflammatories or as masking agents (ASADA, 2007c). Substances in this class
are outlined in Table 16.
74
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Table 16: Peptide hormones, mimetics and analogues commonly used in Australia
Drug name
Potential effects
Brand name
Forms
Erythropoietin (EPO)
Increases endurance and
recovery from anaerobic
exercise
Eprex, Aranesp
Ampoules,
pre-packed syringe
Human chorionic
gonadotrophin
Used to manage the side
effects of AAS use such
as gynaecomastiaa and
shrinking testicles
APL, Pregnyl, Profasi,
Novarel, Repronex
Vial, ampoules
Human growth hormone
(HGH)
Used to increase muscle
size and strength
Norditropin, Norditropin
SimpleXx, Genotropin,
Humatrope, Saizen,
Scitropin
Penset, vial, auto injector
cartridge
Insulin
Used because of the
perception that it
contributes to increased
muscle bulkb
NovoRapid, Apidra,
Humalog, Hypurin
Neutral, Actrapid,
Humulin R, Protaphane,
NovoMix 30
Vial, penset,
pre-packed syringe
Pituitary and synthetic
gonadotrophins
Used to overcome the
side effects of AAS use or
as a masking agent
Clomid, Bravelle
Ampoules, tablet
Insulin-like growth factor
Used to increase muscle
bulk and reduce body fat
Increlex
Vial
Corticotrophins
Used because of its antiinflammatory properties
and for mood elevating
effects
Synacthen Depot
Ampoules
Anti-oesterones
Used to manage the side
effects of AAS use such as
gynaecomastiaa
Nolvadex
Tablet
a. The development of breast-like tissue in males.
b. There is no scientific evidence of this.
OTHER DRUGS
75
International Trends
Continued criminal involvement in AAS has been detected by law enforcement agencies at an
international level. In the period December 2005 to September 2007, an international anti-steroid
operation, Operation Raw Deal, targeted the illegal manufacture and trafficking of anabolic
steroids in the United States of America (US), Canada and Mexico. The investigation resulted
in the seizure of 11.4 million steroid dosage units and 242 kilograms of raw steroid powder. It
also identified the use of the Internet to purchase steroids and obtain technical information on
their use and conversion from raw powder into finished product (Wood, 2007). Australian law
enforcement involvement also contributed to this US-led international investigation through
Operation Kasha (Australian Customs Service, 2007).
Operation Raw Deal confirmed that AAS are being smuggled into the US from Mexico and some
European countries where prescriptions are not required for purchase. The investigation also
confirmed the prevalence of the illegal manufacture of steroids in clandestine laboratories
(ONDCP, 2007; Wood, 2007).
Domestic trends
Australian border situation
Australian Customs Service (Customs) detected 1,677 anabolic agents and other selected
hormones in 2006–07. This was a significant increase from 1,087 in 2005–06, and 1,049 in 2004–05
(see Figure 24). In 2006–07, these comprised of 1,150 steroid detections, 285 DHEA detections
and 242 selected hormones detections. When compared to 2005–06, these figures represent a 62
percent increase in the number of detections of steroids, a 40 percent increase in detections of
DHEA, and a 38 percent increase in detections of selected hormones (see Figure 25).
76
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Operation Kasha resulted in 1,405 separate detections of PIEDs between October 2006 and July
2007. During this period, 90,000 tablets, 60,000 capsules, 4,000 vials and 650 ampoules of PIEDs
were also detected. Operation Kasha also resulted in one of the largest detections of PIEDs of
more than 40 kilograms of steroid powder (Australian Customs Service, 2007a).
Figure 24: Number of detections of anabolic agents and other selected hormones at the
Australian border, 1996–97 to 2006­–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,000
800
600
400
200
2006–07
2005–06
2004–05
2003–04
2002–03
2001–02
2000–01
1999–2000
1998–99
1997–98
0
1996–97
Number
1,200
Year
OTHER DRUGS
77
Figure 25: Number of detections of anabolic agents and other selected hormones, by category, at
the Australian border, 1996–97 to 2006–07 (Source: Australian Customs Service)
Steroids
1,400
DHEA
Hormones
1,200
Number
1,000
800
600
400
200
2006–07
2005–06
2004–05
2003–04
2002–03
2001–02
2000–01
1999–2000
1998–99
1997–98
1996–97
0
Year
Significant border detections
The majority of detections of anabolic agents and selected hormones involved small quantities
imported for personal use or small-scale trafficking. However, there were two large detections of
40 kilograms in sea cargo in 2006–07.
Importation methods
Anabolic agents and selected hormones were generally imported using a ‘scatter importation’
methodology (commonly used for heroin and cocaine) via postal articles and air cargo parcels.
78
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Domestic market indicators
Price
A recent assessment on regular PIED users in New South Wales found that, injectable veterinary
AAS ranged between $2 to $15 per millilitre, injectable human AAS was $20 to $40 per millilitre,
oral human AAS ranged from $0.80 to $3.50 per tablet, and anti-oestrogen tablets were $2.50
to $10 per tablet. Users reported that HGH was priced at approximately $450 to $500 per week
for a four to six week ‘cycle’. However, a ‘cycle’ could not be appropriately described (Larance and
Degenhardt, 2007).
Availability
Persons importing PIEDs into Australia were identified as personal trainers, bodybuilders and
male models (Magnay, 2007). Operation KASHA identified a significant illicit market for PIEDs,
with PIEDs sold in gyms, nightclubs and by suburban dealers (Australian Customs Service, 2007a).
According to an assessment of regular PIED users in New South Wales, the majority sourced
PIEDs through personal networks of trusted suppliers. Fifty-five percent indicated that their
supplier was someone they knew ‘quite well’ or ‘extremely well’(Larance and Degenhardt, 2007).
Only a small proportion of users had used PIEDs consistently for one year. In 63 percent of
cases, users reported that supplier’s stocks dictated which PIEDs they used. Additionally, the
assessment noted that, prior to 2000, AAS was perceived as a ‘genuine’ product and more readily
available. Users reported increases in the number of counterfeit AAS and alternative products
since 2000 (Larance and Degenhardt, 2007).
AAS remains the most prevalent PIED used for non-medical purposes in Australia. The
assessment noted that users had reported an increased diversification in the types of other PIEDs
consumed in conjunction with AAS. These included anti-oestrogens, stimulants, insulin, diuretics
and HGH. Since the late 1990s, there has also been a reported minor shift away from the use
of veterinarian AAS products towards human AAS products and prohormones (Larance and
Degenhardt, 2007).
Prohormones can convert in the body to testosterone or the anabolic steroid, nandrolone (Orchard et al., 2006).
OTHER DRUGS
79
Seizures and arrests
The number and weight of national steroid seizures has increased since 2005–06, with the
weight of seizures the highest on record (see Figure 26). Nationally, the weight of steroid seizures
increased by 63 percent and the number of seizures increased by 57 percent. The increase in
domestic seizures coincided with an increase in border detections. The number of national
steroid arrests increased from 67 in 2005–06 to 142 in 2006–07, representing a 112 percent
increase from the previous reporting period.
Figure 26: National steroid seizures, by weight and number, 1997–98 to 2006–07a
Weight (gm)
120
Number
10,000
100
8,000
80
6,000
60
4,000
40
2,000
20
2006–07
2005–06
2004–05
2003–04
2002–03
2001–02
2000–01
1999–2000
1998–99
0
1997–98
0
Number
Weight (gm)
12,000
Year
a.
80
Steroid seizures weights for Western Australia were unable to be extracted this reporting period.
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Tryptamines
Main forms
Tryptamines are hallucinogenic substances found predominantly in nature. However, the
majority of tryptamines can also be produced synthetically. The synthetic form of tryptamine
most commonly used in Australia is lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD). Natural forms of
tryptamines contain psilocybin and psilocin, and can be found in certain mushroom species
indigenous to tropical and subtropical regions of South America, Mexico, the US and Australia
(Picker and Rickards, 1970; ABS, 2000; DEA, 2003). Synthetic psilocybin can also be produced and
formulated into tablets, capsules or dissolved in a liquid (DrugInfo Clearinghouse, 2007).
There are a number of less common forms of natural hallucinogens. One form is
dimethyltryptamine (DMT), which is found in a range of plants and seeds. It can also be
produced synthetically. The effects of DMT are short-lived, generally lasting 45 minutes to one
hour (DEA, 2003). However, this section will cover LSD and psilocybin-containing mushrooms.
Lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD)
LSD is a synthetic hallucinogen manufactured from lysergic acid. Lysergic acid is found in ergot,
a fungus that grows on rye and other grains (NIDA, 2007a). In its pure form, LSD is a white
odourless powder. LSD is most commonly sold in perforated impregnated paper sheets. It may
also be sold in liquid, tablet, capsule, gelatine square or sugar cube form (DEA, 2003; Dunn et al.,
2007).
LSD is highly potent and even in small doses can produce significant changes in perception,
mood and thought. Its effects can be influenced by a number of factors, such as the disposition
of the person taking the drug (NIDA, 2007a). The long-term use of LSD produces a level of
intolerance and users must progressively take higher doses. The unpredictable nature and
potency of the drug makes LSD highly dangerous (NIDA, 2007a).
OTHER DRUGS
81
Psilocybin-containing Mushrooms
Psilocybin is a hallucinogenic chemical that is found in certain fungi, such as mushrooms (NSW
Department of Health, 2003). Psilocybin may also be produced synthetically (NDIC 2003a). In its
pure form, psilocybin is a white crystalline powder (NSW Department of Health, 2003; DrugInfo
Clearinghouse, 2007).
There are at least 30 known types of psilocybin-containing mushrooms in Australia (Guzmàn,
Allan and Gartz, 1998). These mushrooms are commonly known as ‘magic mushrooms’ (DrugInfo
Clearinghouse, 2007). Psilocybin-containing mushrooms can be ingested orally; consumed raw,
cooked or infused in boiling water (NDIC, 2003a). There have also been reports of mushrooms
being smoked and snorted (Dunn et al., 2007).
International Trends
There is limited data available on the use of LSD internationally. A major US Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA) operation in 2001 may have affected levels of LSD use, with long-term
trends indicating a steady decline in use and in the distribution of LSD. Any major resurgence in
the US is considered unlikely due to the complexity of manufacture and restricted availability of
precursor chemicals (NDIC, 2006; 2007).
In the United Kingdom (UK), recent research on dance drug users has found a decline in the
prevalence of LSD use. However, the use of other tryptamines, such as psilocybin, has risen
(McCambridge et al., 2007).
Domestic trends
Australian border situation
The tryptamines most commonly encountered at the Australian border are LSD and psilocybincontaining mushrooms. LSD detections at the Australian border remain a rarity - there have been
a total of 28 such detections since 1999. There were four Customs detections of LSD in 2006–07,
one more than the previous year. Of these, three detections were in the post with the fourth
being in air cargo. The LSD was in the form of vials (one detection), powder (one detection) and
capsules (one detection). The fourth detection was recorded as unknown. Points of embarkation
included the US (two detections), India (one detection) and China (one detection).
82
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
There have been 12 detections of psilocybin-containing mushrooms in 2006–07. This is a
decrease from 23 in 2005–06 and 24 in 2004–05. Eleven detections were in postal parcels and
one was detected on the body of an air passenger. Most detections were of mushroom spores for
home growing. ‘Magic mushroom’ growing supplies are reportedly traded online by specialised
traders operating from Europe and North America.
Domestic market indicators
According to a national study of injecting drug users, 72 percent reported having used
hallucinogens at some stage in their life. However, recent use and frequency of use was low, with
nine percent reporting use in the six months prior to interview. The same study reported that
LSD was the main hallucinogen used (67 percent of hallucinogen users or 6 percent of the entire
sample), followed by psilocybin‑containing mushrooms (16 percent of hallucinogen users or 2
percent of the entire sample) (O’Brien et al., 2007).
In a 2006 national study of regular ecstasy users, 61 percent reported use of LSD in their lifetime.
Between 2005 and 2006, there were considerable fluctuations in reported LSD use in the
majority of jurisdictions (Dunn et al., 2007).
Price
South Australia Police data reports prices for LSD to range from $10 to $15 per tab. There was
no price data available for psilocybin-containing mushrooms. According to a national study of
regular ecstasy users, the median price for a tab of LSD by jurisdiction ranged from $10 to $20.
The most common median price reported was $20 (Dunn et al., 2007).
Purity
In a national study of regular ecstasy users, 26 percent of respondents commented on the purity
of LSD. Forty-one percent of these respondents reported the purity level of LSD as being ‘high’
while 30 percent reported it as being ‘medium’ (Dunn et al., 2007).
Although there is no specific purity scale for psilocybin-containing mushrooms, the varying
types contain different amounts of tryptamines and other chemicals. As a result, the toxicity and
hallucinogenic activity can vary substantially (DEA, n.d.).
OTHER DRUGS
83
Availability
A national study of regular ecstasy users outlined a mixed response to the availability of LSD. Of
those respondents who commented (26 percent of the entire sample) on the recent availability
of LSD, approximately one third (37 percent) reported that LSD was ‘easy’ to obtain. In contrast,
another third of these respondents (33 percent) reported it as being ‘difficult’ to obtain. In the
same study, 51 percent of respondents stated they had used ‘magic mushrooms’ in their lifetime
and 19 percent reported having used them in the last six months (Dunn et al., 2007).
Seizures and arrests
In 2006–07, the weight of tryptamine seizures was at its lowest since 1997–98 (see Figure
27). As LSD is typically sold in sheets of paper, they are rarely weighed or the weight is not
significant enough to impact on the total seizure weight. While the weight of national seizures of
tryptamine decreased by 8 percent in 2006–07, the number of seizures increased by 52 percent.
Figure 27: National tryptamine seizures, by weight and number, 1997–98 to 2006–07
18,000
Weight (gm)
600
Number
16,000
500
12,000
400
10,000
300
8,000
6,000
200
4,000
100
2,000
Year
84
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
2006–07
2005–06
2004–05
2003–04
2002–03
2001–02
2000–01
1999–2000
1998–99
0
1997–98
0
Number
Weight (gm)
14,000
Anaesthetics
Main forms
Certain drugs such as anaesthetics, which were originally developed for use in medical
procedures, are used illicitly. Two of these are ketamine and gamma‑hydroxybutyrate (GHB).
Ketamine operates as a dissociative anaesthetic, in both medical and veterinary treatments. Due
to its sedative effect on the body, GHB has been used as a treatment for sleep disorders and
alcohol withdrawal (NDIC, 2004; DrugInfo Clearinghouse, 2006; 2007).
Ketamine
Ketamine, also known as ‘K’, ‘Vitamin K’ or ‘Special K’, is considered a dissociative anaesthetic
which alters awareness and produces feelings of ‘dissociation’ from the environment. It has
a combination of stimulant, depressant, hallucinogenic and analgesic properties. Although
ketamine is commonly found in liquid, crystalline and tablet form, although it can also be found
as capsules and tabs. Ketamine can be consumed orally, intranasally, injected intramuscularly or
smoked (NDIC, 2004; DrugInfo Clearinghouse, 2007).
Gamma-hydroxybutyrate (GHB) and related substances
GHB is a naturally occurring chemical in the body. In the US, it was widely available from health
food stores and generally purchased to improve physical appearance. GHB has a sedative effect
on the body and when combined with other drugs, such as alcohol, can cause nausea, breathing
difficulties and death (NDIC, 2003; NIDA, 2007b).
GHB is commonly available in powdered, liquid, capsule or crystalline powder form and can
be taken orally or injected (NDIC, 2003; DrugInfo Clearinghouse, 2006). Instructions for the
production of GHB can be found on the Internet. It can be manufactured illicitly and without
previous chemical knowledge (NDIC, 2006; Interpol, 2007).
Gamma-butyrolactone (GBL) is a direct precursor to GHB. When consumed, GBL converts to GHB
in the body. A similar chemical, 1,4-butanediol (1,4-B), also undergoes the same reaction (Dunn et
al., 2007).
GHB is also commonly referred to as ‘fantasy’, ‘grievous bodily harm’, ‘GBH’, ‘g’, ‘liquid ecstasy’, ‘liquid E’, ‘liquid X’, ‘blue nitro’ and ‘Frankie G’.
OTHER DRUGS
85
International Trends
China has reported an increase in ketamine abuse, now ranking it as the number one drug of
abuse in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) of China. In 2006, approximately
2,300 kilograms of ketamine was seized in the East Asia and Pacific region, with the majority of
seizures recorded in China. While Singapore noted a decrease in ketamine abuse levels, it was still
ranked as the number two drug of abuse in 2006 (UNODC, 2006).
According to a number of reports, the use of GHB is declining in the US and overall levels of
use within the general population are deemed low. Any major resurgence in the US is deemed
unlikely in the near-term (NDIC, 2006; 2007).
Domestic trends
Australian border situation
In 2006–07, there were 11 Customs detections of ketamine, with 8 in parcel post, 2 on air
passengers and 1 in air cargo. This is an increase from eight detections in 2005–06. The largest
detection contained 10 kilograms of suspected ketamine powder, compared to 500 grams
in 2005–06. Parcels were sent from the US, the Philippines, China, Cambodia, Malawi, the
Netherlands, Ireland and Malaysia.
Customs detected 49 shipments of GBL in 2006–07. Forty-eight were detected in postal articles
and one detected in air cargo. The detections included two postal consignments of 20 litres and
10 litres each of pure GBL from the UK. While GBL has a legitimate use as a cleaning product, the
actual end use of a number of shipments were in doubt. Sixty-five percent of parcels containing
GBL were sent from the UK. Other shipments were from the US, Japan, China, the Hong Kong SAR
of China and Poland.
Domestic market indicators
In a national study of regular ecstasy users, 35 percent reported lifetime use of ketamine, while
14 percent had used ketamine in the six months prior to interview. In the same study, 20 percent
reported lifetime use of GHB. Eight percent reported that they had used GHB in the six months
prior to interview. Only one percent reported use of GBL in their lifetime (Dunn et al., 2007).
86
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Price
Law enforcement price data for ketamine and GHB is limited. South Australia Police reported that
the price of ketamine can fluctuate, dependant on the form. The price of ketamine ranged from
$50 for 20 millilitres to $200 for one gram.
According to a national study of regular ecstasy users, there was a notable decrease in the
price of ketamine in a number of jurisdictions. The median price for one gram of ketamine in
the Australian Capital Territory had fallen from $200 in 2004 to $40 in 2006. Victoria, Tasmania
and the Northern Territory also experienced declines in price in 2006. Users in South Australia
reported the highest median price of $300 (Dunn et al., 2007).
South Australia Police data reported that prices of GHB ranged from $3 to $5 per millilitre.
Nationally, prices were reported by users to vary from $1 to $15 per millilitre. The price of GHB
also varied significantly within each jurisdiction. As an example, users in the Australian Capital
Territory, users reported that the cost of GHB ranged from $1 to $10 per millilitre (Dunn et al.,
2007).
Availability
A national study of regular ecstasy users reported discordant findings that ketamine was both
‘difficult’ to obtain (39 percent) and ‘easy to obtain’ (37 percent) (Dunn et al., 2007). Variations in
availability may be attributable to the drug being primarily obtained through diversion activities,
thereby, making supply more irregular.
Nationally, 40 percent of regular ecstasy users reported that GHB was ‘difficult’ to obtain.
Thirty-two percent reported that GHB was ‘easy’ to obtain (Dunn et al., 2007).
Pharmaceuticals
Main forms
Most pharmaceutical drugs that are produced for legitimate medical use are controlled through
prescription and limited to pharmacist supply. However, they are also diverted into the illicit
market. Non-medical use of prescription medications, such as opioids, central nervous system
depressants and stimulants, can lead to addiction and compulsive use (NIDA, 2007c).
OTHER DRUGS
87
The misuse of pharmaceuticals can result from self-medication, dependence, dealing with
withdrawal symptoms, drug substitution, enhancement of other drugs or the unavailability of
a drug of choice. Medications such as benzodiazepines are sought after as a heroin substitute
(DrugInfo Clearinghouse, 2006a).
Pharmaceuticals can be diverted from legitimate use by various methods including:
• stolen or forged prescriptions;
• falsely imitating symptoms;
• burglary of pharmaceutical establishments;
• doctor shopping;
• internet purchases; and
• poor prescribing practices or intentional provision by medical practitioners (DCPC, 2006).
The pharmaceuticals most commonly used for non-medical purposes are benzodiazepines and
opioids (opiate based medications) (DCPC, 2006).
Benzodiazepines
Benzodiazepines are central nervous system depressants used in clinical practice for sedation
and anxiety relief. Their use results in a number of symptoms including memory impairment,
motor in-coordination and decreased reaction time (NCETA, 2004; Loxley, 2007). When
taken orally, they are generally rapidly and fully absorbed within half an hour to two hours
after ingestion. Tolerance to the effects of benzodiazepines, such as the sedative/hypnotic
and psycho-motor effects may occur during long-term use. Additionally, dependence on
benzodiazepines may develop after three to six weeks of therapeutic doses. Poly-drug use, or
concurrent use of benzodiazepines, alcohol or opioids, increases the risk of overdose (NCETA,
2004). The main forms of benzodiazepine-based pharmaceuticals are listed in Table 17.
88
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Table 17: Main forms of benzodiazepine-based pharmaceuticals
Pharmaceutical type
Trade name
Benzodiazepines
User names
Benzos, minor tranquillisers,
downers, sleepers
Bromazepam
Lexotan
Clonazepam
Rivotril
Diazepam
Valium, Ducene, Antenex, Propam
Flunitrazepam
Rohypnol, Hypnodorm
Rohies, roofies
Nitrazepam
Mogadon, Alodorm, Dormican,
Nitepam
Moggies
Oxazepam
Serepax, Murelax, Alepam,
Benzotran
Sarahs
Temazepam
Normison, Temaze, Euhypnos
Footballs, Normies
A national study of regular ecstasy users found that 48 percent of respondent have ever used
benzodiazepines. In the same study, 31 percent of respondent reported recent benzodiazepine
use (Dunn et al., 2007). Forty percent of police detainees also reported that they had used
prescription benzodiazepine in the past fortnight (Mouzos et al., 2007).
International Trends
The illicit diversion and use of pharmaceutical drugs remains an issue for both regulated and
unregulated markets. The International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) notes that drug control
legislation prohibiting the illegal sale of prescription products in Africa, while in place, is
inadequately implemented and enforced. The prevalence of Internet pharmacies, especially in
the US, also remains an area of concern (INCB, 2007).
Diverted pharmaceuticals, such as benzodiazepines, are a continuing threat in the US (NDIC,
2006; 2007). Thailand reported an increase in the illicit use of benzodiazepines in 2006. Elsewhere,
Brunei, Myanmar and Singapore all recorded decreases in the illicit use of benzodiazepines
(UNODC, 2007).
OTHER DRUGS
89
Domestic trends
Australian border situation
Generally, the majority of prescription pharmaceuticals are imported by individuals without
criminal intent. Prescription pharmaceuticals are purchased over the Internet due to cheaper
prices and are often imported in ignorance of the law. With an ageing population and
improvements in Internet technology, this trend is expected to continue.
Customs detected 613 unauthorised importations of benzodiazepine-based sedatives and
tranquillisers in 2006–07. This is an increase from 447 detections in 2005–06 and 341 detections
in 2004–05.
The majority of detections were in parcel post; however, 22 detections were in the luggage of
air passengers and three were in air cargo parcels. Most parcels were sent from Argentina, India,
Pakistan, the US and Thailand. The highest quantities of tablets were from India, Argentina, the US
and Pakistan. Quantities detected varied from single tablets to over 1,000 tablets per detection.
There were four detections consisting of over 1,000 tablets, with two from Thailand and
one each from Argentina and Greece. There were 12 detections of over 300 tablets, and 141
detections of between 100–300 tablets. The majority of detections (342) contained diazepam (a
pharmaceutical type of benzodiazepine).
Domestic market indicators
A 2006 national study of injecting drug users reported that 36 percent of the sample
respondents had used illicit benzodiazepines in the six months prior to interview. Forty-one
percent reported using licit benzodiazepines in the same period (O’Brien et al., 2007).
According to a 2006 national study of regular ecstasy users, 48 percent of respondents
reported use of benzodiazepines in their lifetimes. Thirty-one percent reported recent use of
benzodiazepines (Dunn et al., 2007).
90
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Opiates
The term opiate is used to refer to any drug with an opium-like action, while opioid refers
specifically to those derived from the opium poppy. Opiate pharmaceuticals are used in pain
management. There are several synthetic opiates, the most common being methadone, which
is both used for the management of chronic pain and to treat opioid addiction (NCETA, 2004;
NIDA, 2007c). A product known as ‘homebake heroin’ is also manufactured from codeine-based
pharmaceuticals. Opiates can be snorted, injected, smoked or eaten.
Main forms
Table 18 outlines the main forms of pharmaceutical opiates and other opioids.
Table 18: Main forms and effects of commonly used pharmaceutical opiates and opioids
Pharmaceutical type
Trade name
User names
Comments
Morphine
MS Contin,
Anamorph, Kapanol,
Morphalgin
M, Monkey,
Morph, Miss
Emma, Dreamer,
Hard Stuff, Greys
Main component of opium, powerful
narcotic analgesic
Codeine
Panadine Forte,
Codral Forte,
Dymadon Forte,
Codalgin Forte,
Mersyndol Forte
An extract of opium which is not as strong
as morphine
Pethidine
Peth
Synthetic narcotic analgesic, similar to
morphine but shorter lasting
Methadone (or
Physeptone—tablet
form)
Meth, done,
metho
Synthetic narcotic analgesic, used in
treatment for opioid dependence,
predominantly provided in syrup form to
patients
Beup, Mud
Buprenorphine is used to treat withdrawal
from heroin; employed in maintenance
treatment to block the effects of other
opioids (with duration of 24 to 48 hours)
Buprenorphine
Subutex, Temgesic
OTHER DRUGS
91
International trends
The diversion of buprenorphine from domestic manufacture has been noted in India. In 2006,
Singapore listed buprenorphine as its number one drug of concern. Of 1,545 persons arrested
for drug offences in Singapore during 2006, 31 percent were arrested for buprenorphine related
offences (UNODC, 2007).
Domestic trends
Australian border situation
There were 31 detections of pharmaceutical opiates in 2006–07, down from 46 in 2005–06. 11
detections involved morphine, 4 contained methadone, 15 contained codeine and 1 contained
dihydrocodeine. The majority of detections were in parcel post, with a number of pharmaceutical
opiates also found on air passengers.
There was an air cargo detection that involved 600 methadone tablets sent from Thailand
and a postal detection of 480 morphine tablets from the UK. There were no significantly large
detections (1,000 tablets or more), with only nine containing 100 tablets or more. The main
countries of origin were the US, the UK and Thailand.
Domestic market indicators
Nationally, 52 percent of injecting drug users reported having recently used morphine in the
six months preceding interview. The most significant increases in recent morphine use were
reported in Queensland (32 percent to 53 percent) and the Australian Capital Territory (37
percent to 57 percent). Morphine use was the highest in the Northern Territory, with 81 percent
of respondents reporting recent use (O’Brien et al., 2007).
In the same study, 23 percent of injecting drug users reported use of illicit buprenorphine in the
six months preceding interview. The highest reported use of illicit buprenorphine was in the
Australian Capital Territory (O’Brien et al., 2007). In a national study of regular ecstasy users, five
percent reported use of buprenorphine in their lifetime (Dunn et al., 2007).
92
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Forty-nine percent of the national sample of injecting drug users reported recent use of licit and
illicit methadone. Twenty-three percent also reported the use of illicit methadone syrup in the six
months preceding interview (O’Brien et al., 2007). Nine percent of regular ecstasy users reported
that they have used methadone in their lifetime, with four percent reporting having used
methadone in the six months preceding interview (Dunn et al., 2007). Fifteen percent of injecting
drug users reported recent use of illicit Physeptone (a tablet form of methadone) (O’Brien et al.,
2007).
Price
Law enforcement data on opiates is limited. According to South Australia Police, morphine
drugs were reported to be $5 per 15 milligrams and $30 for 100 milligrams of MS Contin. This
is consistent with reported prices from New South Wales Police of between $30 to $50 for 100
milligrams of MS Contin. In South Australia, Kapanol was reported at $30 to $35 per tablet,
with buprenorphine reported at $5 per two millilitres and $30 per eight millilitres during the
reporting period.
According to a national study of injecting drug users, the price of methadone syrup ranged from
$0.35 to $5 per millilitre. The price of 10 milligram Physeptone tablets ranged from $5 to $150
per tablet (O’Brien et al., 2007).
Availability
In a 2006 national study of injecting drug users, 30 percent of respondents commented on the
availability of methadone syrup. Of these, 38 percent reported that it was ‘easy’ to obtain illicit
methadone, with a further 20 percent reporting that it was ‘very easy’. Twenty-two percent
reported that it was ‘difficult’ to obtain (O’Brien et al., 2007).
National Impact
In 2006–07, the majority of border detections of the drugs discussed in this chapter were
imported via the postal stream. Anabolic agents and selected hormones made up the majority
of border detections during this period. Detection of these substances continued to increase
during 2006–07, with the highest number reported since the previous peak in 2001–02. AAS
detections were predominately of small quantities, using the scatter method of importation.
Importations were primarily for personal use or small-scale trafficking.
OTHER DRUGS
93
There was an increase in both the weight and number of ketamine border detections, signifying
a potential increase in demand. The number of border detections of GBL increased from
29 in 2005–06 to 49 in 2006–07. Border detections of benzodiazepine‑based sedatives and
tranquilisers have also been steadily increasing since 2004–05.
During 2006–07, the weight of national steroid seizures increased 62 percent and the number of
seizures increased 54 percent. Comparatively, the weight of national tryptamine seizures was at
its lowest level since 1997–98.
References
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2000. Australian standard classification of drugs of concern. ABS, Canberra.
Australian Customs Service, 2007. International operation disrupts performance and image enhancing drugs trade (online). Customs Media Release,
25th September 2007. <http://www.customs.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=4232&c=9425> [Accessed 7 February 2008].
Australian Customs Service, 2007a. Customs targets performance drugs smugglers - 29 people charged, 1335 shipments seized during national
operation (online). Customs Media Release, 20th July 2007. <http://www.customs.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=4232&c=9157> [Accessed 7 February
2008].
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA), 2007. Substances: Anabolic agents (online). <www.asada.gov.au/substances/facts/anabolic.
htm> [Accessed 31 October 2007].
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA), 2007a. Substances: Beta-2 agonists (online). <http://www.asada.gov.au/substances/facts/
beta2agonists.htm> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA), 2007b. Substances: Human Growth Hormone (hGH) (online). <http://www.asada.gov.au/
substances/facts/human.htm> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA), 2007c. Substances: Hormones and related substances (online). <http://www.asada.gov.au/
substances/facts/hormones.htm> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
Black, E., Stafford, J., Dunn, M. and Degenhardt, L., 2007. An overview of the 2007 EDRS: the regular ecstasy user survey findings (online). ERDS Drug
Trends Bulletin, October 2007, Sydney: National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney. <http://ndarc.med.
unsw.edu.au/NDARCWeb.nsf/resources/Bulletins_2007/$file/EDRS+BULLETIN+OCTOBER+2007.pdf> [Accessed 17 December 2007]
DEA see U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.
Dollman, B. and Henry-Edwards, S., 2005. Performance and Image-enhancing Drugs (online). Public Health Bulletin, Edition 2, S.A. Department of
Health, pp.4–7. <http://www.health.sa.gov.au/PEHS/publications/PHB-autumn-edition05.pdf> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
DrugInfo Clearinghouse, 2006. GHB (online). Australian Drug Foundation. <http://druginfo.adf.org.au/article.asp?ContentID=ghbfantasy>[Accesse
d 7 December 2007].
DrugInfo Clearinghouse, 2006a. Benzodiazepines (online). Australian Drug Foundation. <http://www.druginfo.adf.org.au/article.asp?ContentID=be
nzodiazepines> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
DrugInfo Clearinghouse, 2007. Hallucinogens (online). Australian Drug Foundation. <http://www.druginfo.adf.org.au/article.asp?ContentID=LSD_
hallucinogens> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
Drugs and Crime Prevention Committee (DCPC), 2006. Inquiry into misuse/abuse of benzodiazepines and other pharmaceutical drugs: Interim report
(online). Parliament of Victoria, Melbourne. <http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/dcpc/Current_Inquiries/pharmaceuticalmisuse/DCPC-Report_
Benzo_2006-08-24.pdf> [Accessed 12 December 2007].
94
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Dunn, M., Degenhardt, L., Campbell, G., George, J., Johnston, J., Kinner, S., Matthews, A., Newman, J., and White, N., 2007. Australian Trends in Ecstasy
and Related Drug Markets 2006: Findings from the Ecstasy and Related Drugs Reporting System (EDRS), Monograph No. 61, National Drug and Alcohol
Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney.
Guzmàn, G., Allan , J.W. and Gartz, J., 1998. A worldwide geographic distribution of the nurotropic fungi: An analysis and discussion (online). <http://
www.museocivico.rovereto.tn.it/UploadDocs/104_art09_Guzman___C.pdf> [Accessed 12 December 2007].
International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), 2007. Report of the International Narcotics Control Board 2006 (online). Analysis of the World Situation:
Africa, United Nations, New York. <http://www.incb.org/incb/en/annual_report_2006.html> [Accessed 12 December 2007].
Interpol, 2007. Synthetic Drugs Glossary (online). <http://www.interpol.int/Public/Drugs/synthetic/glossary.asp#ghb>
[Accessed 31 October 2007].
Larance, B., and Degenhardt, L., 2007. Performance and image enhancing drugs (PIEDs): Current trends and future monitoring (online). IDRS Drug
Trends Bulletin, June 2007, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney. <http://www.med.unsw.edu.
au/NDARCWeb.nsf/resources/Bulletins_2007/$file/IDRS+Bulletin+June07+FINAL.pdf> [Accessed 31 October 2007].
Loxley, W., 2007, Benzodiazepine use and harms among police detainees in Australia (online). Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, No.336,
Australian Institute of Criminology, May 2007. <http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi336.pdf> [Accessed 31 October 2007].
Magnay, J., 2007. Worldwide steroid sting catches Australian bodybuilders in its net (online). Sydney Morning Herald, 29 September.<http://www.
smh.com.au/news/national/worldwide-steroid-sting-catches-australian-bodybuilders-in-its-net/2007/09/28/1190486569810.html>[Accessed 8
February 2008].
McCambridge, J., Winstock, A., Hunt, N. and Mitcheson, L., 2007. 5-Year trends in use of hallucinogens and other adjunct drugs among UK dance drug
users (online). National Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London, UK, 13 (1), pp. 57–64. <http://library.sheba.co.il:8080/
Karger/ProdukteDB/produkte.asp?Aktion=ShowPDF&ArtikelNr=95816&Ausgabe=232235&ProduktNr=224233&filename=95816.pdf>[Accessed
14 February 2008].
Mouzos, J., Hind, N., Smith, L. and Adams, K., 2007. Drug use monitoring in Australia: 2006 annual report on drug use among police detainees (online).
Research and Public Policy Series, No. 75, Australian Institute of Criminology. <http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/rpp/75/> [Accessed 31 October
2007].
National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction (NCETA), 2004. Alcohol and Other Drugs : A Handbook for Health Professionals (online).
Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. <http://www.aodgp.gov.au/internet/aodgp/publishing.nsf/Content/handbook>
[Accessed 11 December 2007].
National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), 2003. GHB and Analogs Fast Facts (online). May 2003. <http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs4/4532/>
[Accessed 7 December 2007].
National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), 2003a. Psilocybin Fast Facts (online). United States Department of Justice, August 2003. <http://www.
usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs6/6038/> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), 2004. Intelligence Bulletin: Ketamine (online). United States Department of Justice, July 2004. <http://
www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs10/10255/> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), 2006. National Drug Threat Assessment 2007, Other Dangerous Drugs (online). United States Department
of Justice. <http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs21/21137/21137p.pdf> [Accessed 31 October 2007].
National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), 2007. National Drug Threat Assessment 2008, Other Dangerous Drugs (online). United States Department
of Justice. < http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs25/25921/25921p.pdf> [Accessed 14 February 2008].
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), 2007. NIDA InfoFacts: Steroids (Anabolic-Androgenic) (online). National Institutes of Health, March 2007.
<http://www.drugabuse.gov/Infofacts/steroids.html> [Accessed 31 October 2007].
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), 2007a. NIDA InfoFacts: LSD (online). National Institutes of Health, June 2007. <http://www.drugabuse.
gov/infofacts/lsd.html> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), 2007b. NIDA InfoFacts: Club Drugs (online). National Institutes of Health, June 2007. <http://www.
drugabuse.gov/infofacts/clubdrugs.html> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), 2007c. NIDA InfoFacts: Prescription Pain and Other Medications (online). National Institutes of Health, June
2007. <http://www.nida.nih.gov/infofacts/PainMed.html> [Accessed 11 December 2007].
OTHER DRUGS
95
NSW Department of Health, 2003. Hallucinogens Factsheet (online). DPB Publications, January 2003. <http://www.health.nsw.gov.au/public-health/
dpb/publications/hallucinogens.html> [Accessed 7 December 2007].
O’Brien, S., Black, E., Degenhardt, L., Roxburgh, A., Campbell, G., de Graaff, B., Fetherston, J., Jenkinson, R., Kinner, S., Moon, C. and White, N., 2007.
Australian Drug Trends 2006: Findings from the Illicit Drug Reporting System (IDRS), Monograph No. 60, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre,
University of New South Wales, Sydney.
Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), 2005. Doping (online). Executive Office of the President of the United States. <http://www.
whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/prevent/sports/doping.html> [Accessed 7 November 2007].
Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), 2007. Steroids (online). Executive Office of the President of the United States. <http://www.
whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/drugfact/steroids/index.html> [Accessed 7 November 2007].
Orchard, J.W., Fricker, P.A., White, S.L., Burke, L.M. and Healey, D. J., 2006. The use and misuse of performance-enhancing substances in sport (online).
The Medical Journal of Australia, Volume 184 Number 3, pp. 132-6. <http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/184_03_060206/orc10359_fm.pdf>
[Accessed 14 February 2008].
Peters, R., Copeland, J., Dillon, P. and Beel, A., 1997. Patterns and Correlates of Anabolic-Androgenic Steroid Use (online). National Drug and Alcohol
Research Centre, Technical Report number 48. <http://www.med.unsw.edu.au/NDARCWeb.nsf/resources/TR_26/$file/TR.048.pdf> [Accessed 4
December 2007].
Picker, J. and Rickards, R.W., 1970. The occurrence of the psychotomimetic agent psilocybin in an Australian agaric, Psilocybe Subaeruginosa (online).
Australian Journal of Chemistry, Vol. 23, pp. 853 – 5. <http://www.publish.csiro.au/?act=view_file&file_id=CH9700853.pdf> [Accessed 14 February
2008].
Sports Medicine Australia, n.d. Chapter 8: Prohibited Classes of Substances C) Anabolic Agents (online). <http://www.sma.org.au/pdfdocuments/
Drugs%20in%20Sport%20-%20Chapter%208.pdf> [Accessed 31 October 2007].
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), 2007. Patterns and Trends of Amphetamine-Type Stimulants (ATS) and Other Drugs of Abuse in
East Asia and the Pacific 2006 . UNODC Regional Centre for East Asia and the Pacific, June 2007.
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 2003. Drugs of Abuse (online). United States Department of Justice.
<http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/abuse/index.htm> [Accessed 27 November 2007].
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), n.d. Psilocybin & Psilocyn and other Tryptamines (online). United States Department of Justice. <http://
www.dea.gov/concern/psilocybin.html> [Accessed 12 November 2007].
Wood, J.F., 2007. News Release – Operation Raw Deal, Operation Juice Box (online). Office of the United States Attorney. <http://www.usdoj.gov/
usao/mow/news2007/wilson.ind.htm> [Accessed 8 November 2007].
96
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
OTHER DRUGS
97
Statistics
Introduction
The Australian Crime Commission (ACC) utilised the National Illicit Drug Reporting Format
(NIDRF) data processing system to process seizure, arrest and purity data for the Illicit Drug Data
Report (IDDR). This allows for more accurate analysis of law enforcement data and assists in
moving towards nationally standardised data holdings.
The movement towards more accurate data has been facilitated by the continued efforts
of police statisticians and/or information managers in each of the state, territory and
Commonwealth agencies over the period covered by this report.
Counting methodology
The following methodology was used to develop a count of arrests by drug type:
• Where a person has been charged with multiple consumer or provider offences for a
particular type of drug, that person is counted once only as a consumer or provider of that
drug.
• Where consumer and provider charges for a particular drug type have been laid, the provider
charge takes precedence and the person is counted only as a provider of that drug.
• A person who has been charged in relation to multiple drug types is counted as a consumer
or provider for each drug type.
• A person is counted on each separate occasion that they are charged.
98
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Data sources
Three sources of drug statistics are used: offence and seizure data, drug purity data and drug
price data.
Arrest and seizure data
Arrest and seizure data were provided by:
• Australian Federal Police (AFP)
• AFP – ACT Policing
• New South Wales Police Force
• Northern Territory Police
• Queensland Police Service
• South Australia Police
• Tasmania Police
• Victoria Police
• Western Australia Police
Drug purity data
Drug purity data were provided by:
• Australian Capital Territory Government Analytical Laboratory
• AFP
• AFP – ACT Policing
• Forensic Science South Australia
• Forensic Science Service Tasmania
• New South Wales Health – Mental Health and Drug and Alcohol Office
• Queensland Health Scientific Services
• Victoria Forensic Science Centre
• Western Australia Forensic Science Laboratory
STATISTICS
99
The purity tables do not represent the purity figures for all seizures of that drug type, only those
that have been analysed at a forensic laboratory. Drug purity figures for Victoria, Queensland,
and the Australian Capital Territory represent the purity level of drugs seized by police during
the relevant quarter. Figures for South Australia, Western Australia, Tasmania and those supplied
by the Australian Forensic Drug Laboratory represent the purity level of drugs received at the
laboratory during the relevant quarter. Specifically, the Western Australian Forensic Science
Laboratory does not analyse all seizures less than two grams. As a result, the purity table will
underestimate the number of samples that are tested.
The time between the date of seizure by police and the date of receipt at the laboratories can
vary from a few days to several months, and in isolated cases, years. The purity table represents
those seizures analysed during the financial year 2006–07, not necessarily all seizures made
during that period.
New South Wales Analytical Laboratory only tests for purity levels on cases larger than the
traffickable level—three grams for amphetamine, methylamphetamine, heroin, cocaine and
0.75 grams for phenethylamines. Additionally, the laboratory will only test a limited number of
samples per case. The laboratory also tests purity levels on controlled operations for the New
South Wales Police, including undercover units.
As drug seizures are not routinely tested in the Northern Territory, the Northern Territory Forensic
Laboratory was unable to provide purity data for this report.
ACT Policing does not test for purity on all seizures—only those which are larger than the
traffickable amount. All samples lodged by ACT Policing with the ACT Government Analytical
Laboratory are tested, but not all are tested for purity. ACT Policing provided the purity data
for inclusion in this report from analysis results provided by the ACT Government Analytical
Laboratory.
Drug price data
Data on prices for illicit drugs were collected from each of the police services and are based
on information supplied by covert police units and police informants. Unless otherwise stated,
police price information has been used.
100
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Limitations of the data
Overview
Despite limitations in the current data set, the ACC’s Illicit Drug Data Report, provides the best
collection of arrest and seizure statistics available in Australia. The NIDRF data processing system
has enabled the ACC to improve statistical quality and reliability.
Seizure data
The seizure data presented in Table 29 include only those seizures for which a drug weight was
recorded. Consequently, it undercounts both the number of seizures and the amount of drug
seized for all drug types. Amphetamine and cannabis data are most likely to be affected by the
variety of measurement methods and these figures should be treated with caution when making
comparisons between jurisdictions or over time. This table includes seizures by the AFP and state
police services.
Datasets
Since the development and implementation of the NIDRF processing system, limitations with
the administrative datasets used to compile the statistics have decreased. However, the following
factors should be considered when utilising the data to develop assessments or conclusions:
• a lack of uniformity across all states and territories in the recording and storing of data on
illicit drug arrests and seizures;
• ongoing problems with quality control, resulting in the absence of essential information from
some records;
• differences in applying a uniform counting and data extraction methodology across all
jurisdictions;
• differences in definitions of consumer and provider offences across and within jurisdictions
over time;
• differences in the way drugs and offences may be coded;
• insufficient drug identification; and
• an inability to identify seizures resulting from joint operations, for example, those involving a
state or territory agency and the AFP.
STATISTICS
101
Recording and storage methods
The lack of consistency between law enforcement agencies in the way they record illicit drug
arrests and seizures presents difficulties when data is aggregated and compared. Disparities exist
in the level of detail recorded for each offence, the methods used to quantify the seizures, the
way offence and seizure data is extracted, and the way counting rules and extraction programs
are applied.
Quality control
Missing, incomplete and non-specific information relating to drug seizures makes it impossible
to calculate precisely the total quantity of each drug type seized. It is thus difficult to analyse
trends on a comparative basis across a number of years. This has been a particularly pertinent
issue since the 2001–02 report as the NIDRF system allows for increased scrutiny of large seizures
that may not have been queried in the past.
Drug identification and coding
Not all illicit drugs seized by law enforcement are scientifically analysed to establish the precise
nature of the drug. In some cases, only seizures of a predetermined weight or those that are the
subject of a ‘not guilty’ plea are scientifically analysed. In some instances, an initial field test may
be carried out to provide an indication as to the seized drug, but all other seizures are recorded
at the discretion of the investigating officer and without further qualification.
A number of jurisdictional data systems do not differentiate between amphetamine-type
stimulants and 3,4-methylendioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), which restricts the ACC’s ability
to monitor and report on national trends in MDMA seizures and arrests. Similar problems exist
with a range of other drugs including ketamine and gamma-butyrolactone (GBL), and in some
jurisdictions seizures of these drugs are recorded as ‘Other Drugs’. Monitoring and reporting on
national trends of these drugs is therefore limited.
102
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Consumers and providers
Offenders are classified as consumers or providers in order to differentiate between people
who have been apprehended for trading in, as opposed to using, illicit drugs. Those charged
with supply-type offences—importation, trafficking, selling, cultivation and manufacture—are
classified as providers. Those charged with user-type offences—possessing or administering
drugs for their own use—are classified as consumers.
In some cases the jurisdictions allocate consumer and provider codes, and in others the ACC
applies the codes based on the information on the type of offence committed. Further, there are
some differences in the methodologies jurisdictions use for applying consumer and provider
codes. For example, in some states and territories, the quantity of the drug involved determines
whether an offence is regarded as a consumer or a provider offence. Also, the threshold quantity
that determines whether a person is to be charged as a provider varies over time, both within
and between states and territories.
Jurisdictional issues
The comparability of law enforcement data across states and territories is problematic. For the
information of agencies and individuals wishing to interpret the data, specific issues regarding
jurisdictional data have been identified by the ACC and the relevant jurisdiction. These issues
have been summarised and are represented below.
New South Wales
The New South Wales (NSW) Police Force provided the ACC with offender and seizure data. The
NSW Health, Mental Health and Drug and Alcohol Office, provided the drug purity data.
Prior to 2005–06, NSW Police Force data was extracted directly from the mainframe recording
system COPS. Since 2005–06, data has been extracted from COPS using a data warehousing
application ‘Enterprise Data Warehouse’. Tests to verify the process of data extraction have been
undertaken and the NSW Police Force are confident that the process of retrieval is comparable
with previous extracts from COPS.
STATISTICS
103
In February 2006, the NSW Police Force introduced mandatory reporting of drug seizure weights
on COPS. This has significantly reduced the number of records with a seizure weight of zero. This
change to recording procedures has resulted in a more accurate representation of drug seizure
weights and reduced the number of records excluded by the IDDR counting rules for zero
weights.
Victoria
Victoria Police provided offender and seizure data. Drug quantities and weights reported are
estimates only and are not validated by forensic analysis. In 2004–05, Victoria rewrote its data
extraction program and improved the data quality checks. Further data quality processes
have been implemented to improve the data. Victoria Forensic Science Centre provided the
drug purity data. The Victorian clandestine laboratories figure includes only those reported to
or attended by the Clandestine Laboratory Squad, and does not account for all laboratories
processed by the Victoria Police Forensic Services Department.
Queensland
During the 2006–07 reporting period, the Queensland Police Service changed administrative
systems. As a result, caution should be exercised in comparing the current data with previous
periods.
South Australia
South Australia Police provided offender and seizure data, but did not include this data for offenders
participating in the Drug Diversion Program. Forensic Science SA provided the purity data.
Western Australia
Western Australia Police introduced a new incident recording system in 2002–03, which
changed the method for recording drug seizures. For this reason, care should be exercised when
comparing data across years. The steroid seizure weight data was unable to be extracted this
reporting period, and hence is understated. The Western Australia Forensic Science Laboratory
provided the purity data.
104
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Tasmania
Tasmania Police provided offender and seizure data. It is important to note that the figures
reported may differ from those reported in the Tasmania Police Annual Report 2006–07 or other
publications. The information supplied to the ACC is to be considered an accurate representation
of illicit drug statistics. Forensic Science Service Tasmania provided the purity data.
Northern Territory
Northern Territory Police provided offender and seizure data. Seizure data for the Northern
Territory relates to suspected drug type only. The number of Drug Infringement Notices (DINs)
may differ to those provided in the Northern Territory Police, fire and Emergency Services Annual
Report 2006–07 or those extracted from the Integrated Justice Information System (IJIS).
Australian Capital Territory
The Australian Federal Police (AFP) – ACT Policing provided offender, seizure and purity data.
Data is comparable with figures in the 2002–03 IDDR report onwards. As some previous
Australian Capital Territory data were not provided by ACT Policing, comparison across these
years should be undertaken with caution.
Australian Customs Service (Customs)
Customs’ border detections of illicit drugs are handed to the AFP for investigation purposes,
safe storage and destruction. Border detections are recorded on ‘Druglan’, which is updated with
confirmed seizure weight data from the AFP. At present, there is no provision for an automatic
update of accurate weights to Druglan. Data relating to the same border detections held by the
AFP and Druglan will differ slightly. This is because only unconfirmed seizure weights are initially
recorded.
Australian Federal Police (AFP)
The Reporting Operations Monitoring Centre provided national offender, seizure and purity
data for the AFP. Joint seizures with the Australian Customs Service are represented within AFP
figures in Table 29. Totals may differ from those reported in the AFP Annual Report 2006–07 due to
different counting rules applied.
STATISTICS
105
Explanatory notes
The following explanatory notes relate to terms used in this report.
Arrest
‘Arrest’ incorporates all recorded law enforcement action against a person for suspected unlawful
involvement in illicit drugs. It incorporates enforcement action by way of arrest, summons,
diversion program, cannabis expiation notice in South Australia, simple cannabis offence notice
in the Australian Capital Territory, drug infringement notice in the Northern Territory, and ‘notice
to appear’ in Queensland. Some charges may subsequently have been dropped or the defendant
may have been found not guilty.
Seizure
‘Seizure’ is the confiscation by a law enforcement agency of a quantity of an illicit drug or
a regulated drug being used or possessed unlawfully, whether or not an arrest is made in
conjunction with that confiscation.
The amount of drug seized may be recorded by weight, volume and linear measurement, or
as a unit count (for example, number of tablets, plants or bags). The method of estimating the
amount of drug seized varies between and within jurisdictions. As an example, seizures of
amphetamine in tablet form may be weighed or counted. Similarly, seizures of cannabis plants
may be weighed, counted or measured. Seizure data supplied for 2006–07 may also exclude
seizures that are the subject of ongoing investigations.
Heroin and other opioids
‘Heroin and other opioids’ include opiate analgesics such as heroin, morphine, opium, codeine
and opioid analgesics such as methadone and pethidine.
Cocaine
‘Cocaine’ includes cocaine, coca leaf and coca paste.
Amphetamine-type stimulants
Unless otherwise specified, ‘Amphetamine-type stimulants’ include amphetamine,
methylamphetamine and phenethylamines.
106
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
Phenethylamines
Phenethylamines include 3,4-methylendioxymethamphetamine (MDMA—commonly known as
‘ecstasy’), 3,4-methylendioxyethylamphetamine (MDEA), 3,4‑methylendioxyamphetamine (MDA),
dimethoxyamphetamine (DMA) and paramethoxyamphetamine (PMA).
Cannabis
‘Cannabis’ includes cannabis plant, leaf, resin, oil, seed and all other forms.
Hallucinogen
‘Hallucinogen’ includes tryptamines such as lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) and psilocybin
(mushrooms).
Steroid
‘Steroid’ includes anabolic and androgenic steroids such as testosterone, nandrolone and
stanazolol.
Other drugs
‘Other drugs’ includes phencyclidine (PCP or angel dust), diazepam, lignocaine, benzocaine,
dothiepin, flunitrazepam, other prescription drugs and any drug not included elsewhere.
Symbols and abbreviations
The following symbols and abbreviations are used in the tables:
na
not available
n.e.c not elsewhere classified
no.
number
r
revised figure
%
percent
–
zero, or rounded to zero
Figures that have been rounded may not add to totals.
STATISTICS
107
108
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
9,834r
7,443r
20,452
477r
4,502
6,522r
1,493
1,333
423
262
274
76
53,091r
Male
1,885r
1,468
5,906
114
839
1,919r
383
310
86
77
59
13
13,059r
Female
5r
20r
300
1r
52
11
2
0
0
0
0
0
391r
Not
known
11,724r
8,931r
26,658
592r
5,393
8,452
1,878
1,643
509
339
333
89
66,541r
Total
2,427r
3,086
3,485r
1,158
0
2,121
0
288
117
0
57
0
12,739r
Male
428
605
818
272
0
661
0
83
49
0
6
0
2,922
Female
Provider
0
14
40
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
54
Not
known
2,855r
3,705
4,343r
1,430
0
2,782
0
371
166
0
63
0
15,715r
Total
a. Includes those offenders for whom consumer/provider status was not stated. Total may exceed the sum of the table components.
b. Cannabis Expiation Notices.
c. Cannabis Infringement Notices.
d. Drug Infringement Notices.
e. Simple Cannabis Offence Notices.
Note: The arrest data for each state and territory include AFP data.
NSW
Vic
Qld
SA
SA CENs b
WA
WA CINs c
Tas
NT
NT DINs d
ACT
ACT SCONs e
Total
State/territory
Consumer
Table 19: All drugs: consumer and provider arrests, by state and territory and gender, 2006–07
12,314r
10,529r
23,937r
1,635r
4,502
8,643r
1,493
1,624
592
262
331
76
65,938r
Male
2,321r
2,073
6,724
386
839
2,580r
383
394
150
77
65
13
16,005r
Female
Total a
5r
34r
340
1r
52
11
2
0
1
0
0
0
446r
Not
known
Total
14,640r
12,636r
31,001r
2,022r
5,393
11,234
1,878
2,018
743
339
396
89
82,389r
STATISTICS
109
1,926r
1,952
2,695r
132
1,577
84
71
77
8,514r
Male
411
364
843
52
580
24
22
22
2,318
Female
0
8r
52
0
3
0
0
0
63r
Not
known
2,337r
2,324r
3,590r
184
2,160
108
93
99
10,895r
Total
930
936
694r
235
661
55
28
30
3,569r
Male
135
142
146
81
190
14
0
3
711
Female
Provider
0
5
7
0
0
0
0
0
12
Not
known
1,065
1,083
847r
316
851
69
28
33
4,292r
Total
7,215
4,210r
15,708
313
4,502
3,505
1,493
1,190
336
262
168
76
38,978r
Male
1,296
798
4,429
49
839
879r
383
261
64
77
35
13
9,123r
Female
4
11
209
1r
52
4
2
0
0
0
0
0
283r
Not
known
8,515
5,019r
20,346
363r
5,393
4,388r
1,878
1,451
400
339
203
89
48,384r
Total
1,132
1,473
1,884
868
0
1,041
0
219
88
0
19
0
6,724
Male
226
337
451
172
0
345
0
61
49
0
2
0
1,643
Female
Provider
0
7
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
25
Not
known
1,358
1,817
2,353
1,040
0
1,386
0
280
137
0
21
0
8,392
Total
92
a. Includes those offenders for whom consumer/provider status was not stated. Total may exceed the sum of the table components.
b. Cannabis Expiation Notices.
c. Cannabis Infringement Notices.
d. Drug Infringement Notices.
e. Simple Cannabis Offence Notices.
Note: The arrest data for each state and territory include AFP data.
NSW
Vic
Qld
SA
SA CENs b
WA
WA CINs c
Tas
NT
NT DINs d
ACT
ACT SCONs e
Total
State/territory
Consumer
Table 21: Cannabis: consumer and provider arrests, by state and territory and gender, 2006–07
a. Includes those offenders for whom consumer/provider status was not stated. Total may exceed the sum of the table components.
Note: The arrest data for each state and territory include AFP data.
NSW
Vic
Qld
SA
WA
Tas
NT
ACT
Total
State/territory
Consumer
Male
8,376
5,683r
17,592
1,181
4,502
4,546
1,493
1,410
463
262
187
76
45,771r
Male
2,867r
2,888
3,389
367
2,238
141
110
107
12,107r
Table 20: Amphetamine-type stimulants: consumer and provider arrests, by state and territory and gender, 2006–07
1,526
1,135
4,880
221
839
1,224r
383
323
124
77
37
13
10,782r
Female
Total a
549
506
989
133
770
38
24
25
3,034
Female
Total a
4
18
227
1r
52
4
2
0
1
0
0
0
309r
Not
known
0
13r
59
0
3
0
0
0
75r
Not
known
9,906
6,836r
22,699
1,403r
5,393
5,774r
1,878
1,733
588
339
224
89
56,862r
Total
Total
3,416r
3,407r
4,437
500
3,011
179
134
132
15,216
110
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
280
555r
166
9
63r
9
1
14
1,097r
Male
81r
138
59
7
25
2
0
2
314r
Female
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
3
Not
known
361r
693r
227
16
89r
11
1
16
1,414r
Total
158
308
38
23
47
2
0
5
581
Male
42
68
20
11
12
3
0
1
157
0
1
5
0
0
0
0
0
6
Provider
Not known
Female
200
377
63
34
59
5
0
6
744
Total
180
62
56r
2
12
0
1
7
320r
Male
30r
9
15
1
4
0
0
0
59r
Female
0r
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0r
Not
known
210
71
71r
3
16
0
1
7
379r
Total
139r
50
65r
8
24
1
0
0
287r
Male
18
5
7
0
2
0
0
0
32
Female
Provider
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Not
known
157r
56
72r
8
26
1
0
0
320r
Total
a. Includes those offenders for whom consumer/provider status was not stated. Total may exceed the sum of the table components.
Note: The arrest data for each state and territory include AFP data.
NSW
Vic
Qld
SA
WA
Tas
NT
ACT
Total
State/territory
Consumer
Table 23: Cocaine: consumer and provider arrests, by state and territory and gender, 2006–07
a. Includes those offenders for whom consumer/provider status or sex was not stated. Total may exceed the sum of the table components
Note: The arrest data for each state and territory include AFP data.
NSW
Vic
Qld
SA
WA
Tas
NT
ACT
Total
State/territory
Consumer
Table 22: Heroin and other opioids: consumer and provider arrests, by state and territory and gender, 2006–07
319r
112
121r
10
36
1
1
7
607r
Male
443
863r
204
32
110r
11
1
19
1,683r
Male
48r
14
22
1
6
0
0
0
91r
Female
Total a
124r
206
79
18
37
5
0
3
472r
0r
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1r
Not
known
0
1
7
0
1
0
0
0
9
Total a
Not known
Female
367r
127
143r
11
42
1
1
7
699r
Total
567r
1,070r
290
50
148r
16
1
22
2,164r
Total
STATISTICS
111
35
23
52
3
23
1
5
0
142
Male
4
1
16
0
4
0
0
0
25
Female
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Not
known
39
24
68
3
27
1
5
0
167
Total
12
10
24
3
14
1
1
1
66
Male
0
1
5
0
4
0
0
0
10
Female
Provider
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Not
known
12
11
29
3
18
1
1
1
76
Total
6
0
67
0
15
4
9
8
109
Male
1
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
6
Female
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
Not
known
7
0
73
0
15
4
9
8
116
Total
2
0
10
0
5
0
0
0
17
Male
1
0
3
0
1
0
0
0
5
Female
Provider
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Not
known
3
0
13
0
6
0
0
0
22
Total
a. Includes those offenders for whom consumer/provider status was not stated. Total may exceed the sum of the table components.
Note: The arrest data for each state and territory include AFP data.
NSW
Vic
Qld
SA
WA
Tas
NT
ACT
Total
State/territory
Consumer
Table 25: Steroids: consumer and provider arrests, by state and territory and gender, 2006–07
a. Includes those offenders for whom consumer/provider status was not stated. Total may exceed the sum of the table components.
Note: The arrest data for each state and territory include AFP data.
NSW
Vic
Qld
SA
WA
Tas
NT
ACT
Total
State/territory
Consumer
Table 24: Hallucinogens: consumer and provider arrests, by state and territory and gender, 2006–07
8
0
77
0
20
4
11
8
128
Male
47
33
76
6
37
2
6
1
208
Male
2
0
8
0
1
0
2
0
13
Female
Total a
4
2
21
0
8
0
0
0
35
Female
Total a
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
Not
known
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Not
known
10
0
86
0
21
4
13
8
142
Total
51
35
97
6
45
2
6
1
243
Total
112
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
192r
641r
1,708r
18r
1,327
45
0
0
3,931r
Male
62
158
539
5
427
23
0
0
1,214
Female
1
1
36
0
3
0
0
0
41
Not
known
255r
800r
2,283r
23r
1,757
68
0
0
5,186r
Total
54
309
770
21
329
10
0
2
1,495
Male
6
52
186
8
107
5
0
0
364
Female
Provider
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
10
Not
known
60
361
966
29
436
15
0
2
1,869
Total
46,165
2,503
5,914
145
87
97
4,746
59,657
2002–03
47,885
2,390
6,734
153
81
82
6,498
63,823r
2003–04
55,689
3,824
8,313
250
124
113
6,660
74,973
2002–03
no
74
5
11
0
0
0
9
100
%
95
Note: Includes arrests where consumer/provider information was not recorded.
Cannabis
Heroin and other opioids
Amphetamine-type stimulants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens
Steroids
Other and unknown
Total
Drug type
57,741
3,691
9,593
328
124
99
8,444
80,020r
%
72.2
4.6
12.0
0.4
0.2
0.1
10.6
100
47,390
1,462
8,183
240
96
52
6,097
63,520
2005–06
2003–04
no.
Table 28: All arrests: number and proportion, by drug type, 2002–03 to 2006–07
46,253
2,051
7,297
257
89
90
6,172
62,209
2004–05
Consumers
Note: Excludes arrests where consumer/provider information was not recorded.
Cannabis
Heroin and other opioids
Amphetamine-type stimulants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens
Steroids
Other and unknown
Total
Drug type
Table 27: All arrests: consumers and providers, by drug type, 2002–03 to 2006–07
48,384r
1,414r
10,895r
379r
167
116
5,186r
66,541r
2006–07
54,936
3,304
10,068
425
119
124
8,357
77,333
2004–05
no.
a. Includes those offenders for whom consumer/provider status was not stated. Total may exceed the sum of the table components.
Note: The arrest data for each state and territory include AFP data.
NSW
Vic
Qld
SA
WA
Tas
NT
ACT
Total
State/territory
Consumer
71
4
13
1
0
0
11
100
%
9,217
1,311
2,340
105
37
12
1,731
14,753
Male
254r
950r
2,478r
39r
1,656
55
0
2
5,434r
2002–03
Table 26: Other and unknown drugs: consumer and provider arrests, by state and territory and gender, 2006–07
71.0
2.9
15.1
0.5
0.2
0.1
10.3
100
%
8,505
1,207
2,696
164
30
19
1,992
14,613
2004–05
1
1
46
0
3
0
0
0
51
Not
known
Providers
2005–06
no.
55,732
2,249
11,848
396
143
67
8,098
78,533
2,805
175
42
12
1,883
15,451
1,299
9,235
2003–04
68
210
725
13
534
28
0
0
1,578
Female
Total a
%
69.0
2.6
18.5
0.8
0.3
0.2
8.6
100
8,392
744
4,292r
320r
76
22
1,869
15,715r
2006–07
2006–07
no.
56,862r
2,164r
15,216
699r
243
142
7,063r
82,389r
8,223
781
3,623
156
44
14
1,915
14,756
2005–06
323r
1,161r
3,249r
52r
2,193
83
0
2
7,063r
Total
STATISTICS
113
5
8
28r
1,782r
57
1,105
23r
2,251r
22
7,900
286r
49,670r
670r
4,425,882r
302r
659,525r
166
6,487
772
23,587
4,134
186,873
547
9,068
Vic
NSW
2
48
6
433
30
5,425
190
1,342
59
66,142
2,665
32,091
Qld
3
200
0
0
0
0
26
953
5
1,917
214
5,110
SA
0
0
4
7
16
3,567
170
1,730
32r
7,001r
3,796
27,925
WA
0
0
6
673
0
0
0
0
0
0
238
4,209
Tas
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
1r
4r
127
1,409
NT
0
0
14
51
0
0
21
42
0
0
228
1,318
ACT
56r
4,281r
92
2,277
354r
66,562r
1,122
19,623
1,069r
5,160,471r
12,174
282,522
Total
Cocaine
State police
Seizures (no.)
437
28
109
9
34
2
3
8
630
Weight (gms)
22,345
1,202
2,020
80
176
7
26
1
25,857
AFP
Seizures (no.)
483r
20r
44r
1
5r
0
0
1
554r
Weight (gms)
458,715r
2,994r
159,061r
0
11r
0
0
0
620,781r
Note: Includes only those seizures for which a drug weight was recorded. There is at present no way to adjust for double counting of some seizures resulting from joint operations
between the AFP and state and territory police services. Totals may differ from those reported in jurisdictional annual reports due to the different counting rules applied.
Other opioids
State police
Seizures (no.)
Weight (gms)
AFP
Seizures (no.)
Weight (gms)
Heroin
State police
Seizures (no.)
Weight (gms)
AFP
Seizures (no.)
Weight (gms)
Amphetamine-type stimulants
State police
Seizures (no.)
Weight (gms)
AFP
Seizures (no.)
Weight (gms)
Table 29: Seizures: drug type, by state and territory, 2006–07
114
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
6
142
1
0
51
102
2r
5r
1
1,552
2
42
80r
916r
230r
27,112r
0
0
2,956
1,571,135
10,118
1,037,801
47
1,003
Vic
NSW
0
0
12
122
3r
134r
11
6,337
73r
2,807r
16,587
650,881
Qld
0
0
1
111
0
0
0
0
18
10,626
413
683,557
SA
0
0
22
2,171
0
0
0ª
0
130r
455r
8,857
348,073
WA
0
0
2
10
0
0
3
4
1
4
2,896
188,776
Tas
0
0
5
55
0
0
10
286
2
0
986
55,202
NT
0
0
3
0
0
0
14
284
2
2
495
204,553
ACT
3r
5r
102
2,713
6r
1,728r
85
7,914
536r
41,922r
43,308
4,739,978
Total
Other and unknown drugs
State police
Seizures (no.)
977
120
379
4
676
8
25
50
2,239
Weight (gms)
185,418
11,478
50,280
604
9,787
113
1,631
8,742
268,053
AFP
Seizures (no.)
98r
31r
19
12r
9
0
0
0
169r
Weight (gms)
73,520r
400,810r
6,314r
43,678r
192
0
0
0
524,514r
a. Steroid seizure data was unable to be extracted this reporting period.
Note: Includes only those seizures for which a drug weight was recorded. There is at present no way to adjust for double counting of some seizures resulting from joint operations
between the AFP and state and territory police services. Totals may differ from those reported in jurisdictional annual reports due to the different counting rules applied.
Hallucinogens
State police
Seizures (no.)
Weight (gms)
AFP
Seizures (no.)
Weight (gms)
Steroids
State police
Seizures (no.)
Weight (gms)
AFP
Seizures (no.)
Weight (gms)
Cannabis
State police
Seizures (no.)
Weight (gms)
AFP
Seizures (no.)
Weight (gms)
Table 29 (Cont’d): Seizures: drug type, by state and territory, 2006–07
STATISTICS
115
66.3
–
66.3
5.0
14.6
5.0
–
–
37
–
37
20
6
26
–
–
SA
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
–
–
4.6
10.7
4.6
38.1
–
38.1
2.3
4.5
2.3
2.2
–
2.2
3.0
10.2
3.0
29.9
–
29.9
6.5
8.0
6.5
–
–
22.8
27.0
27.0
70.6
–
70.6
68.0
14.8
68.0
70.1
–
70.1
57.0
70.6
70.6
80.2
–
80.2
72.5
86.5
86.5
–
–
59
2
61
10
–
10
93
14
107
27
–
27
32
8
40
59
–
59
18
15
33
–
–
15.0
15.5
15.0
71.9
–
71.9
13.4
14.4
13.6
58.4
–
58.4
16.6
15.0
16.5
69.8
–
69.8
17.3
25.0
20.0
–
–
12.6
15.3
12.6
66.8
–
66.8
4.4
6.0
4.4
4.0
–
4.0
3.8
8.3
3.8
3.5
–
3.5
5.0
16.5
5.0
–
–
24.5
15.7
24.5
80.5
–
80.5
68.6
17.4
68.6
75.2
–
75.2
62.2
37.1
62.2
77.7
–
77.7
30.5
51.5
51.5
October–December 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
–
–
29
1
30
–
–
–
53
12
65
1
–
1
35
13
48
24
–
24
15
10
25
–
–
19.6
16.0
19.4
–
–
–
14.1
11.2
13.2
76.5
–
76.5
16.5
14.0
15.3
66.5
–
66.5
11.0
23.5
17.5
–
–
1.3
16.0
1.3
–
–
–
0.3
6.8
0.3
76.5
–
76.5
6.5
10.9
6.5
32.1
–
32.1
6.5
17.5
6.5
–
–
23.9
15.9
23.9
–
–
–
67.4
13.2
67.4
76.5
–
76.5
24.0
75.6
75.6
76.7
–
76.7
27.0
75.5
75.5
January–March 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
2
–
6
9
15
1
–
1
–
2
2
2
–
2
23
8
31
8
–
8
13
9
22
60.0
–
20.8
75.4
52.6
58.9
–
58.9
–
11.7
11.7
62.0
–
62.0
15.9
15.7
15.9
54.3
–
54.3
32.5
25.0
30.5
59.7
–
11.2
23.9
11.2
58.9
–
58.9
–
9.3
9.3
61.7
–
61.7
1.8
10.2
1.8
46.8
–
46.8
10.0
16.0
10.0
April–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min
(no.)
(%) (%)
60.2
–
31.7
79.4
79.4
58.9
–
58.9
–
14.0
14.0
62.2
–
62.2
57.0
22.8
57.0
55.0
–
55.0
36.5
69.5
69.5
Max
(%)
2
–
114
18
132
48
–
48
184
44
228
68
–
68
223
54
277
134
–
134
86
40
126
60.0
–
15.2
25.5
15.3
67.6
–
67.6
12.4
11.6
12.2
59.3
–
59.3
15.3
15.1
15.2
67.1
–
67.1
18.3
23.5
20.3
59.7
–
1.3
10.7
1.3
38.1
–
38.1
0.3
4.5
0.3
2.2
–
2.2
1.8
8.3
1.8
3.5
–
3.5
5.0
8.0
5.0
60.2
–
31.7
79.4
79.4
80.5
–
80.5
68.6
17.4
68.6
76.5
–
76.5
62.2
75.6
75.6
80.2
–
80.2
72.5
86.5
86.5
Total July 2006–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
98
Total
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
2
60.0 59.7 60.2
2
60.0 59.7 60.2
Note: Figures do not represent the purity levels of all heroin seizures – only those that have been analysed at a forensic laboratory. Figures for Western Australia, Tasmania and those supplied by the Australian
Forensic Drug Laboratory represent the purity levels of heroin received at the laboratory in the relevant quarter; figures for all other jurisdictions represent the purity levels of heroin seized by police in the relevant
quarter. The period between the date of seizure by police and the date of receipt at the laboratory can vary greatly. No adjustment has been made to account for double counting joint operations between the AFP and
state/territory police.
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
9.3
10.0
9.5
65.0
–
65.0
38
–
38
38
16
54
14.6
15.4
14.6
67.9
–
67.9
43
–
43
133
25
158
20.3
14.5
19.5
40
6
46
Qld
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
Vic
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
NSW
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
State/territory
July–September 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
Table 30: Heroin purity levels: state and territory, by quarter, 2006–07
116
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
–
–
–
–
–
–
1
1
2
ACT
Territory police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
9.5
21.1
9.5
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
9.5
21.1
21.1
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Max
(%)
1
1
2
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
1
–
1
3
4
7
Cases
(no.)
6.2
17.3
11.8
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
53.1
–
53.1
9.0
14.0
12.0
6.2
17.3
6.2
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
53.1
–
53.1
2.0
12.0
2.0
Purity
Median Min
(%) (%)
October–December 2006
6.2
17.3
17.3
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
53.1
–
53.1
53.0
59.0
59.0
Max
(%)
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
1
–
1
1
19
20
Cases
(no.)
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
24.7
–
24.7
18.0
16.0
16.0
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
24.7
–
24.7
18.0
11.0
11.0
Purity
Median Min
(%) (%)
January–March 2007
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
24.7
–
24.7
18.0
64.0
64.0
Max
(%)
1
–
1
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
10
–
10
2
44
46
Cases
(no.)
26.7
–
26.7
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
71.3
–
71.3
49.0
14.0
14.0
26.7
–
26.7
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
69.0
–
69.0
25.0
0.2
0.2
Purity
Median Min
(%) (%)
April–June 2007
26.7
–
26.7
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
72.8
–
72.8
73.0
42.0
73.0
Max
(%)
3
2
5
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
12
–
12
6
67
73
Cases
(no.)
9.5
19.2
17.3
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
71.2
–
71.2
21.5
14.0
14.0
6.2
17.3
6.2
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
24.7
–
24.7
2.0
0.2
0.2
Purity
Median Min
(%) (%)
26.7
21.1
26.7
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
72.8
–
72.8
73.0
64.0
73.0
Max
(%)
Total July 2006–June 2007
99
AFP
<=2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
>2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Total
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Note: Figures do not represent the purity levels of all heroin seizures – only those that have been analysed at a forensic laboratory. Figures for Western Australia, Tasmania and those supplied by the Australian
Forensic Drug Laboratory represent the purity levels of heroin received at the laboratory in the relevant quarter; figures for all other jurisdictions represent the purity levels of heroin seized by police in the relevant
quarter. The period between the date of seizure by police and the date of receipt at the laboratory can vary greatly. No adjustment has been made to account for double counting joint operations between the AFP and
state/territory police.
9.5
21.1
15.3
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Purity
Median Min
(%) (%)
NT
Territory police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
Tas
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
WA
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
State/territory
Cases
(no.)
July–September 2006
Table 30 (cont’d): Heroin purity levels: state and territory, by quarter, 2006–07
STATISTICS
117
0.4
0.4
0.4
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
2
2
4
27.1
18.8
18.8
–
–
–
–
–
–
2
1
3
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
0.2
0.3
0.2
–
–
–
10.3
18.8
10.3
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
0.6
0.4
0.6
–
–
–
43.8
18.8
43.8
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
October–December 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
1
0
1
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
15.4
0.0
15.4
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
15.4
0.0
15.4
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
15.4
0.0
15.4
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
January–March 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
2
0
2
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
20.2
0.0
20.2
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
2.8
0.0
2.8
–
–
–
–
–
–
April–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min
(no.)
(%) (%)
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
37.6
0.0
37.6
–
–
–
–
–
–
Max
(%)
1
0
1
2
2
4
–
–
–
4
1
5
–
–
–
–
–
–
15.4
0.0
15.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
–
–
–
24.0
18.8
18.8
–
–
–
–
–
–
15.4
0.0
15.4
0.2
0.3
0.2
–
–
–
2.8
18.8
2.8
–
–
–
–
–
–
15.4
0.0
15.4
0.6
0.4
0.6
–
–
–
43.8
18.8
43.8
–
–
–
–
–
–
Total July 2006–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
100
SA
State police
<=2 gms
4
8.2
0.3 37.1
12
59.5 19.3 60.4
2
26.8
0.4 53.1
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
18
58.4
0.3 60.4
>2 gms
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4
1.1
0.7
1.2
2
0.5
0.4
0.5
6
0.9
0.4
1.2
Total
4
8.2
0.3 37.1
12
59.5 19.3 60.4
6
1.1
0.4 53.1
2
0.5
0.4
0.5
24
45.2
0.3 60.4
AFP
<=2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
>2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Total
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Note: Figures do not represent the purity levels of all amphetamine seizures – only those that have been analysed at a forensic laboratory. Figures for Western Australia, Tasmania and those supplied by the Australian
Forensic Drug Laboratory represent the purity levels of amphetamine received at the laboratory in the relevant quarter; figures for all other jurisdictions represent the purity levels of amphetamine seized by police in
the relevant quarter. The period between the date of seizure by police and the date of receipt at the laboratory can vary greatly. No adjustment has been made to account for double counting joint operations between the
AFP and state/territory police.
Qld
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
Vic
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
State/territory
NSW
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
July–September 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
Table 31: Amphetamine purity levels: state and territory, by quarter, 2006–07
118
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
18.6
21.5
19.2
–
–
–
–
–
–
10
10
20
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
3.7
1.9
1.9
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
40.8
73.4
73.4
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
6
6
12
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
17.5
14.6
15.9
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
10.9
0.2
0.2
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
76.2
76.8
76.8
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
October–December 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
0
2
2
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
0.0
32.8
32.8
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
8.0
17.0
14.5
1
3
4
0.0
2.8
2.8
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
8.0
12.0
8.0
0.0
62.7
62.7
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
8.0
19.0
19.0
January–March 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
13
6
19
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
23.4
57.4
42.7
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
8.0
4.0
4.0
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
April–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min
(no.)
(%) (%)
74.2
60.8
74.2
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Max
(%)
29
24
53
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
1
3
4
19.7
21.8
19.7
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
8.0
17.0
14.5
3.7
0.2
0.2
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
8.0
12.0
8.0
76.2
76.8
76.8
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
8.0
19.0
19.0
Total July 2006–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
101
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
>2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Total
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Note: Figures do not represent the purity levels of all amphetamine seizures – only those that have been analysed at a forensic laboratory. Figures for Western Australia, Tasmania and those supplied by the Australian
Forensic Drug Laboratory represent the purity levels of amphetamine received at the laboratory in the relevant quarter; figures for all other jurisdictions represent the purity levels of amphetamine seized by police in
the relevant quarter. The period between the date of seizure by police and the date of receipt at the laboratory can vary greatly. No adjustment has been made to account for double counting joint operations between the
AFP and state/territory police.
ACT
Territory police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
NT
Territory police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
Tas
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
WA
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
State/territory
July–September 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
Table 31 (cont’d): Amphetamine purity levels: state and territory, by quarter 2006–07
STATISTICS
119
17.9
32.6
21.0
–
–
–
–
–
–
157
116
273
11.7
11.0
11.3
26.2
–
26.2
1
–
1
273
135
408
14.0
15.5
14.3
76.9
–
76.9
6
–
6
174
64
238
23.0
11.3
15.5
49
112
161
0.1
0.1
0.1
–
–
–
0.1
0.1
0.1
26.2
–
26.2
0.6
0.4
0.4
75.1
–
75.1
1.5
0.3
0.3
76.9
78.8
78.8
–
–
–
79.1
78.0
79.1
26.2
–
26.2
92.9
82.7
92.9
80.7
–
80.7
76.0
81.5
81.5
174
33
207
–
1
1
270
126
396
–
–
–
112
24
136
27
6
33
32
86
118
15.1
19.8
15.4
–
8.3
8.3
11.0
11.4
11.1
–
–
–
11.7
14.8
11.7
63.4
1.6
51.6
22.0
26.8
26.0
0.0
2.1
0.0
–
8.3
8.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
–
–
–
1.6
0.7
0.7
10.5
1.6
1.6
4.0
1.0
1.0
77.0
74.1
77.0
–
8.3
8.3
77.9
73.1
77.9
–
–
–
82.9
46.2
82.9
76.4
1.6
76.4
74.5
80.0
80.0
October–December 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
179
81
260
1
–
1
366
153
519
2
–
2
67
40
107
40
–
40
22
76
98
25.8
27.1
25.8
38.1
–
38.1
10.0
14.1
11.3
77.1
–
77.1
15.7
15.1
15.6
64.8
–
64.8
12.3
24.8
21.0
0.0
0.8
0.0
38.1
–
38.1
0.3
0.1
0.1
75.5
–
75.5
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.9
–
0.9
2.0
1.5
1.5
78.5
80.0
80.0
38.1
–
38.1
78.1
74.1
78.1
78.7
–
78.7
85.3
90.6
90.6
82.5
–
82.5
70.0
80.0
80.0
January–March 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
125
42
167
–
–
–
72
39
111
10
–
10
32
19
51
41
13
54
37
75
112
22.0
22.0
22.0
–
–
–
15.5
17.7
15.8
62.8
–
62.8
19.3
19.1
19.1
75.2
41.1
56.0
13.5
14.0
13.8
0.1
0.0
0.0
–
–
–
1.0
0.5
0.5
22.9
–
22.9
2.9
3.0
2.9
0.1
0.5
0.1
1.5
1.0
1.0
April–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min
(no.)
(%) (%)
79.9
72.8
79.9
–
–
–
78.8
67.9
78.8
77.6
–
77.6
68.2
61.0
68.2
80.1
44.8
80.1
67.5
80.0
80.0
Max
(%)
635
272
907
1
1
2
981
453
1434
13
–
13
385
147
532
114
19
133
140
349
489
20.0
27.6
21.6
38.1
8.3
23.2
11.1
12.3
11.4
70.2
–
70.2
13.5
15.6
14.3
65.6
1.7
63.4
18.8
18.5
18.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
38.1
8.3
8.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
22.9
–
22.9
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
0.1
1.5
0.3
0.3
102
–
–
–
79.9
80.0
80.0
38.1
8.3
38.1
79.1
78.0
79.1
78.7
–
78.7
92.9
90.6
92.9
82.5
44.8
82.5
76.0
81.5
81.5
Total July 2006–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
>2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Total
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Note: Figures do not represent the purity levels of all methylamphetamine seizures – only those that have been analysed at a forensic laboratory. Figures for Western Australia, Tasmania and those supplied by the
Australian Forensic Drug Laboratory represent the purity levels of methylamphetamine received at the laboratory in the relevant quarter; figures for all other jurisdictions represent the purity levels of
methylamphetamine seized by police in the relevant quarter. The period between the date of seizure by police and the date of receipt at the laboratory can vary greatly. No adjustment has been made to account for
double counting joint operations between the AFP and state/territory police.
SA
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Qld
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
Vic
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
State/territory
NSW
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
July–September 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
Table 32: Methylamphetamine purity levels: state and territory, by quarter, 2006–07
120
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
9.9
9.9
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
3
3
12.0
18.5
17.0
23
62
85
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
7.8
7.8
–
–
–
6.0
0.0
0.0
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
27.7
27.7
–
–
–
55.0
72.0
72.0
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
14
7
21
2
1
3
51
222
273
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
24.6
2.4
24.6
11.7
5.2
10.8
21.0
25.0
24.0
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
3.1
2.4
2.4
10.8
5.2
5.2
0.9
0.0
0.0
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
24.6
27.0
27.0
12.5
5.2
12.5
72.0
68.0
72.0
October–December 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
1
1
–
–
–
56
129
185
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
8.4
8.4
–
–
–
17.5
19.0
18.0
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
8.4
8.4
–
–
–
0.1
0.1
0.1
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
8.4
8.4
–
–
–
67.0
72.0
72.0
January–March 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
1
12
13
5
–
5
55
149
204
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
7.3
7.0
7.3
79.5
–
79.5
13.0
20.0
19.0
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
7.3
4.7
4.7
11.6
–
11.6
0.4
0.1
0.1
April–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min
(no.)
(%) (%)
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
7.3
26.4
26.4
81.9
–
81.9
64.0
83.0
83.0
Max
(%)
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
15
23
38
7
1
8
185
562
747
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
24.6
6.5
12.4
23.2
5.2
17.9
17.0
21.0
20.0
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
3.1
2.4
2.4
10.8
5.2
5.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
103
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
24.6
27.7
27.7
81.9
5.2
81.9
72.0
83.0
83.0
Total July 2006–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
>2 gms
Total
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Note: Figures do not represent the purity levels of all methylamphetamine seizures – only those that have been analysed at a forensic laboratory. Figures for Western Australia, Tasmania and those supplied by the
Australian Forensic Drug Laboratory represent the purity levels of methylamphetamine received at the laboratory in the relevant quarter; figures for all other jurisdictions represent the purity levels of
methylamphetamine seized by police in the relevant quarter. The period between the date of seizure by police and the date of receipt at the laboratory can vary greatly. No adjustment has been made to account for
double counting joint operations between the AFP and state/territory police.
ACT
Territory police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
NT
Territory police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
Tas
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
WA
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
State/territory
July–September 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
Table 32 (cont’d): Methylamphetamine purity levels: state and territory, by quarter, 2006–07
STATISTICS
121
24.5
29.0
27.8
29.3
22.9
27.7
4
4
8
24
69
93
31.2
29.3
29.6
25.7
18.9
18.9
1
35
36
60
76
136
28.9
26.6
28.3
23.9
31.7
30.8
4
7
11
130
30
160
28.8
33.5
33.0
44
66
110
Cases
(no.)
0.2
0.1
0.1
25.3
17.9
17.9
4.6
1.2
1.2
25.7
6.9
6.9
0.8
3.9
0.8
8.5
19.2
8.5
7.5
1.5
1.5
38.5
40.3
40.3
76.3
31.0
76.3
71.0
64.8
71.0
25.7
29.4
29.4
91.7
83.2
91.7
31.2
89.3
89.3
85.0
95.5
95.5
15
13
28
5
3
8
144
152
296
2
8
10
102
20
122
15
20
35
35
42
77
26.9
21.6
21.7
43.0
30.9
31.2
26.1
22.6
23.9
60.0
86.7
82.4
29.8
28.7
29.6
28.1
89.7
88.9
26.0
29.3
29.0
16.0
1.8
1.8
21.7
26.7
21.7
0.2
0.5
0.2
44.3
80.7
44.3
0.4
4.1
0.4
14.4
86.9
14.4
11.5
15.0
11.5
48.2
38.8
48.2
71.1
31.2
71.1
78.2
77.7
78.2
75.6
91.3
91.3
87.2
51.2
87.2
37.7
91.0
91.0
53.0
87.5
87.5
October–December 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
24
16
40
2
6
8
135
156
291
1
16
17
42
37
79
24
–
24
20
33
53
Cases
(no.)
24.6
22.3
23.5
53.7
20.1
20.4
27.7
25.9
27.3
10.9
45.2
45.1
27.6
18.1
22.1
31.1
–
31.1
22.8
30.0
25.5
15.8
6.0
6.0
33.7
17.6
17.6
0.9
1.4
0.9
10.9
12.6
10.9
2.0
1.7
1.7
16.7
–
16.7
3.5
14.5
3.5
49.6
48.7
49.6
73.6
41.8
73.6
76.0
79.2
79.2
10.9
48.6
48.6
83.9
51.9
83.9
59.0
–
59.0
62.0
73.5
73.5
January–March 2007
Purity
Median Min Max
(%) (%) (%)
32
20
52
–
1
1
32
89
121
–
–
–
11
6
17
14
–
14
31
38
69
Cases
(no.)
23.6
17.0
21.9
–
20.3
20.3
22.1
20.9
21.0
–
–
–
29.4
29.3
29.4
79.0
–
79.0
32.0
29.0
30.5
0.5
3.0
0.5
–
20.3
20.3
1.4
0.7
0.7
–
–
–
2.7
6.7
2.7
76.6
–
76.6
12.0
3.0
3.0
51.0
48.1
51.0
–
20.3
20.3
45.3
81.6
81.6
–
–
–
47.8
38.9
47.8
85.8
–
85.8
73.5
80.5
80.5
April–June 2007
Purity
Median Min Max
(%) (%) (%)
95
118
213
11
14
25
371
473
844
4
59
63
285
93
378
57
27
84
130
179
309
24.4
21.9
23.3
33.7
20.4
28.4
27.3
23.7
25.2
35.0
24.8
25.1
29.2
23.7
28.4
31.4
89.5
38.4
28.0
30.5
30.0
0.2
0.1
0.1
21.7
17.6
17.6
0.2
0.5
0.2
10.9
6.9
6.9
0.4
1.7
0.4
8.5
19.2
8.5
3.5
1.5
1.5
51.0
48.7
51.0
76.3
41.8
76.3
78.2
81.6
81.6
75.6
91.3
91.3
91.7
83.2
91.7
85.8
91.0
91.0
85.0
95.5
95.5
Total July 2006–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
104
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
>2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Total
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Note: Phenethylamines include DOB, DOM, MDA, MDEA, MDMA, Mescaline, PMA, TMA and Phenethylamines n.e.c. Figures do not represent the purity levels of all phenethylamine seizures – only those that have
been analysed at a forensic laboratory. Figures for Western Australia, Tasmania and those supplied by the Australian Forensic Drug Laboratory represent the purity levels of phenethylamines received at the laboratory
in the relevant quarter; figures for all other jurisdictions represent the purity levels of phenethylamines seized by police in the relevant quarter. The period between the date of seizure by police and the date of receipt at
the laboratory can vary greatly. No adjustment has been made to account for double counting joint operations between the AFP and state/territory police.
SA
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Qld
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
Vic
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
State/territory
NSW
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
July–September 2006
Purity
Median Min Max
(%) (%) (%)
Table 33: Phenethylamines purity levels: state and territory, by quarter, 2006–07
122
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
26.5
33.7
28.6
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
8
6
14
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
26.5
26.9
26.5
40.0
–
40.0
1
–
1
1
2
3
28.0
30.0
30.0
1
10
11
–
–
–
24.3
0.2
0.2
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
26.5
26.0
26.0
40.0
–
40.0
28.0
25.0
25.0
Min
(%)
–
–
–
32.2
37.4
37.4
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
26.5
27.7
27.7
40.0
–
40.0
28.0
37.0
37.0
Max
(%)
–
–
–
4
5
9
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
3
–
3
8
13
21
Cases
(no.)
–
–
–
27.1
38.1
27.9
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
43.3
–
43.3
28.0
28.0
28.0
Median
(%)
–
–
–
13.9
26.3
13.9
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
42.7
–
42.7
27.0
15.0
15.0
Min
(%)
Purity
October–December 2006
–
–
–
27.9
44.5
44.5
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
44.4
–
44.4
32.0
47.0
47.0
Max
(%)
–
–
–
5
3
8
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
1
1
–
–
–
6
24
30
Cases
(no.)
–
–
–
28.4
22.2
24.3
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
54.7
54.7
–
–
–
48.0
24.5
28.5
Median
(%)
–
–
–
16.1
9.9
9.9
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
54.7
54.7
–
–
–
22.0
12.0
12.0
Min
(%)
Purity
January–March 2007
–
–
–
45.9
24.0
45.9
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
54.7
54.7
–
–
–
50.0
51.0
51.0
Max
(%)
–
–
–
20
4
24
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
15
17
32
Cases
(no.)
–
–
–
24.2
22.0
23.3
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
25.0
24.0
24.0
Median
(%)
–
–
–
18.1
20.3
18.1
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
15.0
0.6
0.6
Min
(%)
Purity
April–June 2007
–
–
–
51.2
26.0
51.2
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
50.0
49.0
50.0
Max
(%)
–
–
–
37
18
55
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
1
3
4
4
–
4
30
64
94
Cases
(no.)
–
–
–
26.6
26.2
26.4
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
26.5
27.7
27.1
43.0
–
43.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
–
–
–
13.9
0.2
0.2
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
26.5
26.0
26.0
40.0
–
40.0
15.0
0.6
0.6
Min
(%)
Purity
Median
(%)
Total July 2006–June 2007
105
–
–
–
51.2
44.5
51.2
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
26.5
54.7
54.7
44.4
–
44.4
50.0
51.0
51.0
Max
(%)
Total
Note: Phenethylamines include DOB, DOM, MDA, MDEA, MDMA, Mescaline, PMA, TMA and Phenethylamines n.e.c. Figures do not represent the purity levels of all phenethylamine seizures—only those that have been analysed at a forensic
laboratory. Figures for Western Australia, Tasmania and those supplied by the Australian Forensic Drug Laboratory represent the purity levels of phenethylamines received at the laboratory in the relevant quarter; figures for all other jurisdictions
represent the purity levels of phenethylamines seized by police in the relevant quarter. The period between the date of seizure by police and the date of receipt at the laboratory can vary greatly. No adjustment has been made to account for double
counting joint operations between the AFP and state/territory police.
>2 gms
<=2 gms
AFP
Total
ACT
Territory police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
NT
Territory police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
Tas
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
WA
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
State/territory
Median
(%)
Cases
(no.)
Purity
July–September 2006
Table 33 (cont’d): Phenethylamines purity levels: state and territory, by quarter, 2006–07
STATISTICS
123
63.5
68.2
66.8
78.1
–
78.1
13
–
13
2.7
–
2.7
2
–
2
12
14
26
59.3
29.2
49.7
75.6
29.2
75.5
153
2
155
12
4
16
55.5
67.0
64.5
27
32
59
69.7
–
69.7
25.8
1.1
1.1
2.6
–
2.6
12.7
3.4
3.4
0.6
1.6
0.6
7.5
35.5
7.5
79.9
–
79.9
81.7
84.2
84.2
2.8
–
2.8
85.2
47.1
85.2
89.6
56.8
89.6
89.5
87.0
89.5
39
–
39
21
22
43
16
2
18
9
6
15
89
7
96
7
19
26
76.0
–
76.0
40.2
47.2
42.3
75.6
25.9
75.6
45.7
46.5
45.7
77.6
36.1
77.5
55.0
71.0
70.0
35.7
–
35.7
19.8
23.1
19.8
37.2
25.0
25.0
20.3
18.8
18.8
41.2
30.7
30.7
40.0
35.0
35.0
85.0
–
85.0
89.3
84.1
89.3
77.4
26.7
77.4
78.3
76.6
78.3
86.4
38.1
86.4
88.0
79.5
88.0
October–December 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
8
–
8
17
11
28
1
–
1
12
6
18
98
–
98
7
14
21
75.4
–
75.4
26.2
30.2
28.5
74.3
–
74.3
50.5
37.3
50.5
74.9
–
74.9
23.5
60.0
59.5
63.6
–
63.6
15.4
14.6
14.6
74.3
–
74.3
7.2
5.5
5.5
63.1
–
63.1
16.0
19.0
16.0
78.8
–
78.8
75.4
75.5
75.5
74.3
–
74.3
79.4
63.8
79.4
84.8
–
84.8
73.0
81.5
81.5
January–March 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
3
–
3
5
7
12
4
–
4
5
6
11
138
4
142
2
11
13
85.2
–
85.2
30.1
31.0
30.6
78.0
–
78.0
18.5
43.2
31.9
77.0
42.0
76.9
12.0
60.0
59.5
85.1
–
85.1
11.8
14.1
11.8
57.8
–
57.8
10.3
14.6
10.3
0.4
41.3
0.4
5.5
16.5
5.5
April–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min
(no.)
(%) (%)
86.2
–
86.2
75.8
48.2
75.8
84.6
–
84.6
91.2
64.1
91.2
82.9
53.1
82.9
18.5
73.0
73.0
Max
(%)
63
–
63
55
54
109
23
2
25
38
22
60
478
13
491
43
76
119
76.1
–
76.1
36.9
44.2
40.2
75.6
25.9
75.5
50.5
37.5
46.0
76.6
37.7
76.4
47.5
64.3
61.5
35.7
–
35.7
11.8
1.1
1.1
2.6
25.0
2.6
7.2
3.4
3.4
0.4
1.6
0.4
5.5
16.5
5.5
86.2
–
86.2
89.3
84.2
89.3
84.6
26.7
84.6
91.2
76.6
91.2
89.6
56.8
89.6
89.5
87.0
89.5
Total July 2006–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
106
SA
State police
<=2 gms
3
81.3 80.4 81.7
5
28.6 14.9 76.2
1
78.4 78.4 78.3
2
39.9 35.1 44.7
11
66.1 14.9 81.7
>2 gms
6
80.7 68.9 83.5
12
29.1 27.0 69.3
2
30.8 28.2 33.4
4
54.3 41.6 63.3
24
44.9 27.0 83.5
Total
9
81.0 68.9 83.5
17
29.0 14.9 76.2
3
33.5 28.2 78.3
6
46.5 35.1 63.3
35
48.2 14.9 83.5
AFP
<=2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
2
59.9 59.7 60.0
2
59.9 59.7 60.0
>2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Total
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
2
59.9 59.7 60.0
2
59.9 59.7 60.0
Note: Figures do not represent the purity levels of all cocaine seizures—only those that have been analysed at a forensic laboratory. Figures for Western Australia, Tasmania and those supplied by the Australian
Forensic Drug Laboratory represent the purity levels of cocaine received at the laboratory in the relevant quarter; figures for all other jurisdictions represent the purity levels of cocaine seized by police in the relevant
quarter. The period between the date of seizure by police and the date of receipt at the laboratory can vary greatly. No adjustment has been made to account for double counting joint operations between the AFP and
state/territory police.
Qld
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
Vic
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
NSW
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
State/territory
July–September 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
Table 34: Cocaine purity levels: state and territory, by quarter, 2006–07
124
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
48.0
48.0
–
3
3
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
6.0
6.0
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
76.6
76.6
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
1
4
5
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
90.0
65.0
90.0
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
90.0
17.0
17.0
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
90.0
96.0
96.0
October–December 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
3
3
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
48.0
48.0
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
21.0
21.0
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
56.0
56.0
January–March 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
1
–
1
2
9
11
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
52.7
–
52.7
24.5
66.0
63.0
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
52.7
–
52.7
18.0
28.0
18.0
April–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min
(no.)
(%) (%)
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
52.7
–
52.7
31.0
81.0
81.0
Max
(%)
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
1
–
1
3
19
22
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
52.7
–
52.7
31.0
56.0
55.0
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
52.7
–
52.7
18.0
6.0
6.0
107
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
na
na
na
–
–
–
–
–
–
52.7
–
52.7
90.0
96.0
96.0
Total July 2006–June 2007
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
ACT
Territory police
<=2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
>2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Total
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
AFP
<=2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
>2 gms
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Total
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Note: Figures do not represent the purity levels of all cocaine seizures—only those that have been analysed at a forensic laboratory. Figures for Western Australia, Tasmania and those supplied by the Australian
Forensic Drug Laboratory represent the purity levels of cocaine received at the laboratory in the relevant quarter; figures for all other jurisdictions represent the purity levels of cocaine seized by police in the relevant
quarter. The period between the date of seizure by police and the date of receipt at the laboratory can vary greatly. No adjustment has been made to account for double counting joint operations between the AFP and
state/territory police.
NT
Territory police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
Tas
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
WA
State police
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
AFP
<=2 gms
>2 gms
Total
State/territory
July–September 2006
Purity
Cases Median Min Max
(no.)
(%) (%) (%)
Table 34 (cont’d): Cocaine purity levels: state and territory, by quarter, 2006–07
STATISTICS
125
40–50
1,000–5,000 b
3,500–5,000
na
250–400
na
na
20–35
8,000–10,000
3,500–4,500
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
3,200–3,300
250–300
150–180
20–25
70–100
na
na
na
na
na
na
Vic
na
na
any plant $2,500
3,000–3,600
na
350
na
na
na
5,600
2,800
350
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
a
Qld
na
na
na
1,800–3,200
na
150–1,000 c
na
na
10–50 c
na
1,800–3,200
150–1,000 c
10–50 c
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
SA
na
3,000
4,000–5,000
7,000–8,000
400–500
250
na
25–35
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
WA
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
15–25
60–90
na
180–280
na
na
Tas
Oil
Cap/phial
50
na
na
na
na
na
a = Leaf not commonly sold.
b = Price for plant per metre. Hydroponic plant $2,000–$5,000 per metre; Outdoor plant $1,000–$2,000 per metre
c = High end price for cannabis in Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara (APY) Lands – Indigenous lands located in the far north-west of South Australia.
Hash/resin
Deal (1 gram approx.)
1 mature plant
1 pound
1 kilogram
Ounce bag (28 grams)
1/2 bag (14 grams)
1/4 bag (7 grams)
Deal (1 gram approx.)
Hydroponic
1 kilogram
1 pound
na
200
Ounce bag (28 grams)
1/2 bag (14 grams)
20–35
na
20–35
na
na
150
3,000–3,500
8,000–8,500
NSW
Head
Deal (1 gram approx.)
1/4 bag (7 grams)
Per deal (1 gram approx.)
1/4 bag (7 grams)
1/2 bag (14 grams)
Ounce bag (28 grams)
1 pound
1 kilogram
Leaf
Weight
Table 35: Cannabis prices by state and territory, 2006–07 ($)
na
na
na
3,000–4,000
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
4,000–4,800
350
25–30
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
NT
na
na
na
na
na
300–320
180
20
100
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
ACT
126
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
150–230
na
na
1/2 ounce
na
160,000–210,000
na
na
90,000–120,000
6,900–12,000
na
na
na
na
na
7,500
4,000
na
800–1,000
370–400
na
200
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
a
6,500–10,500 a
na
na
na
400
na
200
na
na
50–100
SA
na 60,000–120,000
8,000
na
na
na
400
na
na
na
na
50
Qld
a = Lower end prices relate to product in ‘cut’ form while upper end prices relate to product in ‘pure’ form.
1 kilogram
Asian catti (700 grams)
1 pound
12.5–ounce block
1/2 Asian catti (350 grams)
1 ounce
na
250–450
8 ball (3.5 grams; i.e. 1/8 ounce)
10–gram bag
Full gram
na
na
1 street weight (0.6–0.8 gram)
1/4 gram
1/2 weight (0.4–0.6 gram)
na
50–200
na
40–70
Vic
NSW
1 taste/cap (0.1–0.3 gram)
Half–point (0.05 gram)
Weight
Table 36: Heroin prices by state and territory, 2006–07 ($)
na
na
150,000–180,000
na
na
10,000–12,000
5,000–6,000
na
1,500–1,800
500–600
400–500
250–350
na
70
80–150
WA
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
50
Tas
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
80–100
NT
na
na
na
na
na
5,500–7,000
na
na
na
300–400
na
170–200
90
na
50
ACT
STATISTICS
127
na
90–150 b
na
na
180–250 b
na
na
400–450 b
900–1,200 b
30–50 b
75,000–85,000 a
160,000–170,000 a
na
200–500 a
na
na
1,200–1,540 a
na
na
1,500–2,000 a
5,000–10,000 a
50–80 a
NSW
1 pound
35,000–40,000 b
1 kilogram
90,000–120,000 b
a - Listed as ‘ice’.
b - Listed as ‘speed’.
c - Listed in non-crystal form as not specified otherwise.
0.7 gram
1 weight gram
2 grams
3 grams
8 ball (3.5 grams; i.e. 1/8 ounce)
1 vial (1/2 ounce)
1 ounce (street deal)
1/4 ounce
1 ounce
1 street deal (0.1 gram)
Non-crystal form
1 pound
1 kilogram
0.7 gram
1 weight gram
2 grams
3 grams
8 ball (3.5 grams; i.e. 1/8 ounce)
1 vial (1/2 ounce)
1 ounce (street deal)
1/4 ounce
1 ounce
1 street deal (0.1 gram)
Crystal form
Weight
45,000
na
na
200–250
200–400
na
400–700
2,700
na
650–1,400
3,000–4,400
35–40
na
na
na
350–380
na
1,000
1,250
2,100
na
1,200–2,500
6,000–8,000
na
Vic
na
na
50 c
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
Qld
na
250–350 c
na
na
450–500 c
na
na
900–1,650 c
4,000–7,000 c
Table 37: Methylamphetamine prices by state and territory, 2006–07 ($)
200–250
200–350
na
na
900–1,200
2,500–3,500
5,000–7,000
na
5,000–7,000
40–50
na
50,000–80,000
na 130,000–150,000
na
50–100
na
na
250–400
na
na
na
na
na
250–400
350–450
na
na
1,200–1,500
3,500–5,000
7,000–11,000
na
7,000–11,000
60–80
WA
na 90,000–110,000
200,000 150,000–180,000
na
250–450
na
na
500–1,200
na
na
na
2,700–6,000
50–100
SA
na
na
na
270–380 c
na
na
na
na
4,000–5,000 c
na
na
50 c
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
Tas
na
na
na
100–150 c
na
na
250–350 c
na
3,500–4,000 c
na
na
50–80 c
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
NT
na
na
200
300
na
na
800
na
na
na
4,000–4,500
25–50
90,000
na
170–250
350–500
na
na
900–1,100
na
5,400–6,000
na
na
50–80
ACT
128
ILLICIT DRUG DATA REPORT 2006–07
30–60
25–35
23–33
16–17
7–16
1 tablet/capsule
10 tablets/capsules (per tab)
25–100 tablets/capsules (per tab)
100–1000 tablets/capsules (per tab)
1000+ tablets/capsules (per tab)
1 cap
1 gram
1/4 ounce
1 ounce
1 pound
1 kilogram
Weight
40–70
200–450
na
5,500–8,500
80,000–90,000
135,000–185,000
NSW
Vic
na
300
na
9,000
na
na
Vic
14–40
20–25
17–18
12–17
na
Table 39: Cocaine prices by state and territory, 2006–07 ($)
NSW
Weight
Table 38: Phenethylamines prices by state and territory, 2006–07 ($)
SA
30–40
25
na
17–20
na
SA
WA
40–50
20–30
20–30
20–30
12–20
WA
na
na
100
350
200–400
300–500
1,800
na
3,000–4,000
7,500
10,000
8,000–12,000
na
na 100,000–120,000
na 150,000–200,000 180,000–200,000
Qld
40
35
18–29
12.50–19
11.50
Qld
na
na
na
na
na
na
Tas
40
28–35
na
20–28
na
Tas
na
na
na
na
na
na
NT
40–60
na
na
na
na
NT
50
300–400
1,800–2,000
5,500–7,000
na
na
ACT
35–40
na
na
25
17–19
ACT
ACC
A USTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION
© ACC 2009. All rights reserved.