{"id":61651,"date":"2020-05-20T16:42:00","date_gmt":"2020-05-20T16:42:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/chinadialogue.net\/?p=61651"},"modified":"2021-02-15T10:25:47","modified_gmt":"2021-02-15T10:25:47","slug":"experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/","title":{"rendered":"Experts question China\u2019s proposed wildlife utilisation whitelist"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The coronavirus epidemic, and its suspected link to the consumption of wild animals, prompted the National People\u2019s Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) to call<\/a> for a ban on eating terrestrial wild animals in late February. This would be China\u2019s toughest restriction ever on the wildlife trade, but it would include some exemptions in the form of a whitelist. Captive-bred animals on the list could still be eaten because they would be regarded as livestock and poultry, not wildlife, and so would fall under the Animal Husbandry Law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In April, the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) issued a draft of the whitelist for consultation, which it calls the National Livestock and Poultry Genetic Resources Directory<\/a>. Alongside traditionally farmed animals, it features a \u201cspecial livestock and poultry\u201d list of 13 wild animal species.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Species on the Ministry of Agriculture’s whitelist<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n

Traditional livestock<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Species<\/strong><\/td>Breeds<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Pig<\/td>Local breeds, cultivated breeds (including cross-breeds of wild and domesticated pigs) and associated strains, and imported breeds and associated strains.<\/td><\/tr>
Horse<\/td>Local breeds, cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
Donkey<\/td>Local breeds, cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
Camel<\/td>Local breeds, cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
Cattle (cow, zebu, water buffalo, yak, gaur)<\/td>Local breeds, cultivated breeds and associated strains, and imported breeds and associated strains.<\/td><\/tr>
Sheep, goat<\/td>Local breeds, cultivated breeds and associated strains, and imported breeds and associated strains.<\/td><\/tr>
Rabbit<\/td>Local breeds, cultivated breeds and associated strains, and imported breeds and associated strains.<\/td><\/tr>
Poultry (chicken, duck, goose, turkey, pigeon, quail)<\/td>Local breeds, cultivated breeds and associated strains, and imported breeds and associated strains.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

Special livestock and poultry<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Species<\/strong><\/td>Breeds<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Sika deer<\/td>Local breeds, cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
Red deer<\/td>Local breeds, cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
Reindeer<\/td>Local breeds, cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
Alpaca<\/td>Cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
Helmeted guineafowl<\/td>Cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
Ring-necked pheasant<\/td>Local breeds, cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
Chinese francolin<\/td>Cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
Mallard<\/td>Cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
Common ostrich<\/td>Cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
American mink (non-food use)<\/td>Cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
Silver fox (non-food use)<\/td>Cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
Arctic fox (non-food use)<\/td>Cultivated breeds and imported breeds.<\/td><\/tr>
Raccoon dog (non-food use)<\/td>Local breeds, cultivated breeds and imported breeds<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Explanatory notes attached to the draft say the animals listed have long been domesticated and bred for commercial farming, adding that public health and ecological concerns have been considered, as have the traditions of ethnic minority groups and \u201ccommon international practice\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But the sika deer and red deer are Class I and II state protected animals, respectively, and several different subspecies of the ring-necked pheasant and Chinese francolin have Class I or II protection, or they belong to the so-called \u201cthree-haves\u201d animals. These are terrestrial animals that have \u201cimportant ecological, scientific and social value\u201d and are protected by the Wildlife Protection Law. The last category also includes the mallard and raccoon dog, which are also in the proposed directory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The explanatory notes say the sika deer was included because it has a long history of being farmed and supports an established industry. The red deer and reindeer were included because they are traditionally used by ethnic minorities. The alpaca is an imported species but \u201chas long been domesticated and has various uses\u201d. Several of the bird species have been imported and are subject to established farming practices. The American mink, silver fox, Arctic fox and raccoon dog are included as \u201cChina has developed breeds suitable for farming, and these are primarily used for fur and for export, not food use\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Read the lists in full here<\/span>

There are five lists currently in use by the National Forestry and Grassland Administration and the Ministry of Agriculture to manage wild animal farming:<\/p>

National Forestry and Grassland Administration<\/strong><\/p>

1. Directory of Captive-bred State Protected Terrestrial Wild Animals (Batch 1)<\/a><\/p>

Ministry of Agriculture<\/strong><\/p>

1. China Livestock and Poultry Genetic Resources Directory<\/p>

2. Directory of Captive-bred State Protected Aquatic Animals<\/a><\/p>

3. Directory of State Protected Commercial Aquatic Animal and Plant Resources<\/a><\/p>

4. List of New Commercial Aquatic Species<\/a><\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

The text also makes clear that while the Animal Husbandry Law applies to these animals when farmed, wild populations still fall under the Wildlife Protection Law and the governance of the National Forestry and Grassland Administration (NFGA).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Will there be only one whitelist?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

According to media reports, the MOA has published a similar whitelist before called the China Livestock and Poultry Genetic Resources Directory. Versions circulating online<\/a> (China Dialogue couldn\u2019t find an official copy) differ from the new national list only in their inclusion of dogs and bees.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The old directory had already prompted criticism following the outbreak of Covid-19. In mid-March, a petition<\/a> published by 17 ecologists, environmentalists and social scientists, called on the government \u201cto avoid repeating the mistake of actively utilising wild animals\u201d in its implementation of the NPCSC\u2019s ban on eating wild animals. The experts called for species in the livestock and poultry directory deemed suitable for consumption to be removed and for no new additions. The petition also demanded that farmed wild animals used for non-food purposes only be allowed onto the list following a rigorous scientific process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is because it is common for meat from animals whitelisted for use in the fur industry \u2013 the American mink, silver fox, Arctic fox and raccoon dog \u2013 to end up on dinner tables, or mislabelled and sold to food manufacturers, and there is a high risk of these animals spreading disease to humans. In late January, research<\/a> carried out at Peking University found that mink were a possible intermediary host of the coronavirus. At the time, other experts also suggested those four species be removed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But Liu Jinmei, General Counsel for Friends of Nature, says the new draft whitelist is already shorter than she expected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In mid-February, 10 organisations, including Friends of Nature, Shanshui Conservation Centre and Duke Kunshan University, published a joint proposal<\/a> for the ongoing revision to the Wildlife Protection Law. They also proposed a whitelist system of wild animals that could be farmed. They set out strict conditions for adding species to the list, including established farming techniques and health standards, low levels of risk to public health, and there being no need to capture animals from the wild. They also called for traceability as a prerequisite for acquiring a farming licence, including retaining genealogical data, breeding files and data on individual animals, and even microchipping.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Liu told China Dialogue that they produced their proposal, which attracted much attention, before the NPCSC\u2019s ban on eating wildlife was announced. Unsure how the government would approach the issue of regulating wild animal usage, their goal was to push for an informal whitelist, which had long been used by the NFGA to greenlight wildlife farming, to be replaced by a public list restrained by law and science. At the time, to them it seemed a more realistic goal<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This informal whitelist first emerged in August 2003, shortly after the SARS epidemic ended. The State Forestry Administration (which became the NFGA in 2018) published a list<\/a> of 54 species for which commercial farming was permitted. This included the civet cat, a SARS intermediary host, and several protected animals such as the sika deer. The list spurred the development of a huge wild-animal farming industry. In October 2012, the State Forestry Administration declared<\/a> the list invalid. However, courts continued to refer to the list to justify lighter punishments<\/a> in cases where protected animals were involved or to uphold<\/a> appeals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"fox<\/div>
Furs for\u00a0sale at a fox farm in Heilongjiang province, China (Image: Alamy)<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Experts say that farming of wild animals continued after the list was invalidated only without the restrictions that had been put in place by it. Too many animals could now be farmed provided they were not under state priority protection (Class I and II) and legal provenance and health certificates were available. A prominent example is the bamboo rat, which is a \u201cthree-haves\u201d animal that was never whitelisted for farming. Yet bamboo rat farming has boomed, with some farmers even becoming online celebrities<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The new whitelist could bring order to this chaotic situation because it doesn\u2019t just cover using animals for food. The special livestock and poultry section of the directory includes animals raised for fur or use in medicines, such as the sika deer, as well as meat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is it possible, then, that the current whitelist could regulate all types of wild animal utilisation in future?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Liu Jinmei says that there may be new whitelists after revisions to the Wildlife Protection Law are finalised, but \u201cwe\u2019d like to retain one single list \u2013 this one from the MOA\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Li Binbin, an assistant professor of environmental science at Duke Kunshan University, who was involved in writing the February joint proposal, said her first reaction to the whitelist was \u201cthis doesn\u2019t look bad\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

She accepts some farming will continue because farmers need to make a living and winding down the sector responsibly will take time. Using the livestock and poultry directory to regulate it makes sense, but she added that farming threatens wild animal populations because these animals are caught to prevent inbreeding in farmed populations. While a market exists for captive-bred wild animals, consumers may continue to prefer those captured from the wild, increasing the risk of poaching. She thinks traceability is a vital precondition of wild animal utilisation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

China has 34 species of tortoise and turtle \u2013 and\u00a0they\u2019re all on the way to extinction. A big reason for that is our utilisation of them, including for food and as pets<\/blockquote>Li Binbin, Assistant Professor of environmental science, Duke Kunshan University<\/cite><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Li wants to see specific quarantine standards to protect the safety of consumers and farmers. She told China Dialogue that no specific standards were in place for farmed wild animals. Instead, those for traditional livestock are applied to the \u201cspecial\u201d animals on the directory: pheasants are treated as chickens, mallards as ducks, and deer as cows. But the scientific basis for such practice is unsound.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Li thinks that as a living document, it\u2019s possible that the whitelist will be expanded. However, animals such as the civet cat and bamboo rat are currently listed as \u201cthree-haves\u201d<\/a> by the NFGA, so the MOA cannot include them into the livestock and poultry directory unless that changes. It will be a \u201clong game\u201d among government departments and civil society, she says.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Her main concern is that if this is the only whitelist for the utilisation of wild animals, many farmers will have to quit. It is unclear if or how they will be compensated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Grey zone for amphibians and reptiles<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

China\u2019s Wildlife Protection Law divides animals into terrestrial and aquatic categories without defining them. Unlike terrestrial animals, aquatic animals received no protection from the NPCSC eating ban and they certainly do not feature on the proposed whitelist for livestock and poultry \u2013 but, Liu and Li say they present even thornier issues.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The most pressing issue is that of amphibians and reptiles who sit on the boundary between terrestrial and aquatic categories, in what Li describes as a wildlife protection \u201cgrey zone\u201d. This is because jurisdiction is claimed both by the NFGA, which manages terrestrial animals, and the MOA, which oversees aquatic animals as part of its fisheries remit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Their situation is \u201chopeless\u201d, says Li, citing the example of reptiles. \u201cChina has 34 species of tortoise and turtle \u2013 and every single one is on the IUCN\u2019s Red List as threatened \u2013 they\u2019re all on the way to extinction. There are very few left in the wild, and a big reason for that is our utilisation of them, including for food and as pets,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"south<\/div>
Amphibians like the South China Cascade frog\u00a0sit in a wildlife protection “grey zone”\u00a0(Image:\u00a0Thomas Brown<\/a>)<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

To remove these animals from the grey area, Li Binbin says that in their joint proposal for the revision of the Wildlife Protection Law, they inserted a definition of \u201caquatic wild animal\u201d to refer to animals that spend their entire life in freshwater or the sea. That excludes amphibians or reptiles that spend part of their life in water, which means those animals will fall under the jurisdiction of the Wildlife Protection Law, rather than the Fisheries Law, which would continue to regard them as resources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some authorities are pushing back against the NPCSC\u2019s eating ban by working in the opposite direction of what Li and her colleagues did in their proposal. Two days after the NPCSC\u2019s ban was announced and citing public health risks, Shenzhen announced a plan <\/a>to further ban the farming of bullfrogs and soft-shell turtles, both widely consumed in the country. This sparked public debate and fierce opposition from the farming industry. Things only calmed down on 4 March, when the MOA issued a statement<\/a> declaring that such animals, which are listed on its \u201cDirectory of State Protected Commercial Aquatic Animal and Plant Resources\u201d, along with amphibians and reptiles on its \u201cList of New Commercial Aquatic Species\u201d, are managed as aquatic animals, and so don\u2019t fall into the scope of NPCSC\u2019s eating ban.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This was a coordinated move. Two days before the MOA\u2019s statement was issued, on 2 March, the NFGA had ordered<\/a> that farming of animals appearing on the MOA\u2019s \u201cDirectory of Captive-bred State Protected Aquatic Animals\u201d and the \u201cDirectory of State Protected Commercial Aquatic Animal and Plant Resources\u201d, would be managed as aquatic wild animals, with licenses or documentation already issued to be cancelled.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From that moment, animals that were formerly overseen by both authorities, all either amphibians or reptiles, would be managed by the MOA.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The change may not be confined to animals already on the MOA\u2019s aquatic lists. In early April, conservation activists asked via the NFGA website<\/a> if farming of the Chinese brown frog was allowed. The response did not directly address farming or eating of the frog. However, it said that experts are working to re-categorise terrestrial and aquatic animals. This means the Chinese brown frog, which is listed as a \u201cthree-haves\u201d terrestrial animal and is not present on any aquatic animal list may still be re-categorised as aquatic and lose the protection of the Wildlife Protection Law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The wildlife eating ban signals China\u2019s wildlife management may shift from blacklisting to whitelisting \u2013 that is, rather than protecting certain rare, endangered or important animals, all animals will be protected by default, with farming and utilisation only permitted for those on a whitelist. This could mean stronger protection, if the whitelist(s) won\u2019t be too long and numerous. But the revision to the wildlife law may not improve the fate of aquatic animals that are not rare or endangered \u2013 including amphibians, reptiles, fish, aquatic mammals and aquatic invertebrates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Li Binbin is worried that the MOA\u2019s Bureau of Fisheries is overly keen on utilisation, meaning no hope of improvement for these animals. \u201cWe hope to see protection and utilisation separated in future reforms, rather than both going on at the same time by the same authority,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

China may ban the utilisation of wildlife except for whitelisted species \u2013 but which animals should be on it?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3513,"featured_media":61652,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[764],"tags":[511,580,610],"hashtags":[],"country":[20000110],"class_list":["post-61651","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-nature","tag-biodiversity","tag-policy","tag-wildlife","country-china"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nExperts question China\u2019s proposed wildlife utilisation whitelist | Dialogue Earth<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"China may ban the utilisation of wildlife except for whitelisted species \u2013 but which animals should be on it?\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Experts question China\u2019s proposed wildlife utilisation whitelist\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"China may ban the utilisation of wildlife except for whitelisted species \u2013 but which animals should be on it?\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Dialogue Earth\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-05-20T16:42:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-02-15T10:25:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/racoon-dog.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2000\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1333\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Coroneo-Seaman Joe\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Coroneo-Seaman Joe\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/061542e510c21e3efd71b48e74a79c77\"},\"headline\":\"Experts question China\u2019s proposed wildlife utilisation whitelist\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-05-20T16:42:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-02-15T10:25:47+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/\"},\"wordCount\":2547,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/racoon-dog.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"Biodiversity\",\"Policy\",\"Wildlife\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Nature\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/\",\"name\":\"Experts question China\u2019s proposed wildlife utilisation whitelist | Dialogue Earth\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/racoon-dog.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-05-20T16:42:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-02-15T10:25:47+00:00\",\"description\":\"China may ban the utilisation of wildlife except for whitelisted species \u2013 but which animals should be on it?\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/racoon-dog.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/racoon-dog.jpg\",\"width\":2000,\"height\":1333,\"caption\":\"HT9RPD Raccoon-dog (Nyctereutes procyonoides) close up of adult Beidaihe, Hebei, China Mayin\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Experts question China\u2019s proposed wildlife utilisation whitelist\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/\",\"name\":\"Dialogue Earth\",\"description\":\"Global climate and environment news\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#organization\",\"name\":\"\u5bf9\u8bdd\u5730\u7403\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Dialogue-Earth-Symbol-Logo_Black-Text.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Dialogue-Earth-Symbol-Logo_Black-Text.png\",\"width\":256,\"height\":256,\"caption\":\"\u5bf9\u8bdd\u5730\u7403\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/DialogueEarth_\",\"\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/DialogueEarth.English\",\"https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/dialogue.earth\/\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/dialogueearth\/\"],\"publishingPrinciples\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/about\/\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/061542e510c21e3efd71b48e74a79c77\",\"name\":\"Coroneo-Seaman Joe\",\"description\":\"Joe Coroneo-Seaman is the Production Assistant at China Dialogue. He has lived and worked in Greater China for 2 years, and has an MA (Hons) in Chinese and French from the University of Edinburgh.\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/author\/coroneo-seamanjoe\/\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/author\/jiangyifan\/\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Experts question China\u2019s proposed wildlife utilisation whitelist | Dialogue Earth","description":"China may ban the utilisation of wildlife except for whitelisted species \u2013 but which animals should be on it?","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Experts question China\u2019s proposed wildlife utilisation whitelist","og_description":"China may ban the utilisation of wildlife except for whitelisted species \u2013 but which animals should be on it?","og_url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/","og_site_name":"Dialogue Earth","article_published_time":"2020-05-20T16:42:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-02-15T10:25:47+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2000,"height":1333,"url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/racoon-dog.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Coroneo-Seaman Joe","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/"},"author":{"name":"Coroneo-Seaman Joe","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/061542e510c21e3efd71b48e74a79c77"},"headline":"Experts question China\u2019s proposed wildlife utilisation whitelist","datePublished":"2020-05-20T16:42:00+00:00","dateModified":"2021-02-15T10:25:47+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/"},"wordCount":2547,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/racoon-dog.jpg","keywords":["Biodiversity","Policy","Wildlife"],"articleSection":["Nature"],"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/","url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/","name":"Experts question China\u2019s proposed wildlife utilisation whitelist | Dialogue Earth","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/racoon-dog.jpg","datePublished":"2020-05-20T16:42:00+00:00","dateModified":"2021-02-15T10:25:47+00:00","description":"China may ban the utilisation of wildlife except for whitelisted species \u2013 but which animals should be on it?","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/racoon-dog.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/racoon-dog.jpg","width":2000,"height":1333,"caption":"HT9RPD Raccoon-dog (Nyctereutes procyonoides) close up of adult Beidaihe, Hebei, China Mayin"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/nature\/experts-question-chinas-proposed-wildlife-utilisation-whitelist\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Experts question China\u2019s proposed wildlife utilisation whitelist"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/","name":"Dialogue Earth","description":"Global climate and environment news","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#organization","name":"\u5bf9\u8bdd\u5730\u7403","url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Dialogue-Earth-Symbol-Logo_Black-Text.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Dialogue-Earth-Symbol-Logo_Black-Text.png","width":256,"height":256,"caption":"\u5bf9\u8bdd\u5730\u7403"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/twitter.com\/DialogueEarth_","","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/DialogueEarth.English","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/dialogue.earth\/","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/dialogueearth\/"],"publishingPrinciples":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/about\/"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/061542e510c21e3efd71b48e74a79c77","name":"Coroneo-Seaman Joe","description":"Joe Coroneo-Seaman is the Production Assistant at China Dialogue. He has lived and worked in Greater China for 2 years, and has an MA (Hons) in Chinese and French from the University of Edinburgh.","url":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/author\/coroneo-seamanjoe\/","sameAs":["https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/author\/jiangyifan\/"]}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61651","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3513"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=61651"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61651\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/61652"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=61651"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=61651"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=61651"},{"taxonomy":"hashtags","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/hashtags?post=61651"},{"taxonomy":"country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dialogue.earth\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/country?post=61651"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}