Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
But more pertinent to our examination of wildlife conservation than its history, tradi-
tion, or widespread nature, are the facts that captive breeding is afforded such a prominent
position in all Chinese discussion of wildlife, and that artificial rearing is invariably as-
sumed to be important before questions are ever asked about why it is being done. The
fundamental Chinese law bearing on wildlife, the 1988 Wildlife Protection Law, to which
I return in detail in the next chapter, makes this explicit. Right up front, under General
Provisions, Article 4 declares “The state shall pursue a policy of strengthening protection
of wildlife resources, actively domesticating and breeding wildlife. . . .” In fact even before
that, in the law's very first article, which functions as a preamble explaining why a law is
needed, it is hinted that mankind is expected to be intimately and actively involved in a
hands-on way with wildlife. The law's second verb, right after the ubiquitous “protect,”
is the word “rescue.” 12 Later, Article 17 states this explicitly, leaving no room for doubt:
“The state shall encourage the domestication and breeding of wildlife.” The remainder of
Article 17 specifies that breeders need a license from an appropriate government agency
but never bothers to explain why such breeding should be encouraged. There is no men-
tion of reintroduction to the wild, of preservation of genetic material, or how research
on these captives might assist in situ conservation. Captive breeding is assumed to be an
end in itself. 13
Books on raising animals abound in China and few make distinctions between wild
and domestic species. 14 Two textbooks have recently been published on the captive rear-
ing of “wildlife.” They provide a wealth of detail on nutrition, proper veterinary care and
facilities, and cover the gamut of species from the highly endangered to the common and
commercially used. What is most notable, however, particularly given the usual Chinese
practice of writing lengthy introductions, is that neither topic contains any introduction
section at all. There is none of the usual division into “types” of captive rearing we would
expect, no discussion of the “importance of captive breeding” or its various rationales.
Both topics start with “nutrition” and take it from there. Implied by the lack of context
is that there is no need to specify an objective to captive breeding, one simply needs to
know how to do it.
Reintroduction into the wild has occurred in China, and is taken seriously, particu-
larly by Chinese biologists. But reference to such experiments in Chinese is vague when
it comes to the degree of connection achieved between animal and habitat. A Western
reader, upon learning that a group of Pere David's deer or saiga antelope had “returned
to their homeland” ( yinhui guxiang ) might reasonably assume that a reintroduction to
the wild had occurred, when in fact such language refers merely to a group of captive
animals being delivered from overseas to captive facilities within China. One commonly
reads that species have been “saved” or are no longer “rare,” only to discover that it is
the captive population that is being discussed. 15 On the principal government Web site
touting national wildlife programs, three of the nine categories of projects reported on
deal with captive animals. 16 Proposed expenditures by governments in support of wildlife
over the fifty-year time period of 2000-2050 are heavily skewed toward activities with
a captive breeding component. If the costs of proposed reintroduction are included, over
37 percent of proposed spending, as outlined by the State Forestry Administration (SFA)
Search WWH ::




Custom Search