Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
class animals are handled by provincial-level Forestry agencies.
27
Thus, from a practical
standpoint, being named as a key species is important: it engages the heavy machinery
of State bureaus in order for anything but strict protection to be official policy toward the
species. But beyond having been named a key species, the listing as first- or second-class
is of little consequence.
Even if the first- vs. second-class distinction is intended to be symbolic or psychological
rather than substantive, there still remain apparent inconsistencies in the decisions made.
For those species included in the first-class list, some designations are beyond dispute.
First-class species include the giant panda, emblem of all Chinese wildlife; the tiger,
which exists within China only as part of tiny, fragmented populations; the wild camel,
relegated now to only the most austere habitats and even there threatened by hybridization
with their domestic descendents; the Yangtze river dolphin, thought to number less than
200; Przewalski's horse, extinct in the wild until recent reintroduction programs using
captive-reared animals; and the exceedingly rare crested ibis, which had been thought
extinct in the wild until a group of seven individuals were discovered in Shaanxi in 1981.
No one would seriously question that these species merit the best conservation nostrums
in the national medical cabinet, regardless of how such a designation was made or exactly
what it would mean in practice.
However, the value of naming species in such clear peril as first-class protected spe-
cies is considerably lessened when they are lumped together with such species as Tibetan
wild ass (which are viewed as a pest by many pastoralists, and for which some provincial
wildlife officials are considering deliberate reduction measures), the takin (observations
of which no longer even elicit much interest in many nature reserves), and such raptors
as golden eagles and lammergeyers, both of which appear, in much of China's west, to be
about as abundant as a top-level predator can possibly be. At the same time that these and
other species appear to be erroneously classed with the most truly endangered, a number
of species that would seem more deserving of being named to the first-class list—such
as the elusive and rarely seen Asiatic wild dog known as the dhole, the argali (at least
in many of the mountain ranges forming its Chinese distribution), and the old-growth
dependent giant squirrel—are listed as second-class species.
Certainly there is logic—maybe even necessity—in issuing a blanket ban on killing
individuals belonging to species in real trouble. As well, if there is a great deal of uncer-
tainty about the status of a species coupled with legitimate concern that it might be in
trouble, a sweeping federal prohibition on killing might be the obvious course. But an
objective look at the taxa currently afforded key status suggests that some relatively abun-
dant species that have a tradition of consumptive use owe their presence on the list more
to the State's desire to assert control and deny citizens access to them than to biological
necessity. Justifying this claim numerically is dicey at best, because population estimates
for most of these species are unreliable. But even if existing estimates do no more than
provide the correct order of magnitude, species in China's west such as Tibetan wild ass,
Tibetan gazelle, ibex, and particularly blue sheep are sufficiently numerous to absorb
limited consumptive use. But the 1988 Law not only fails to provide a mechanism for
regulating any such hypothetical use. By declaring relatively abundant and traditionally
Search WWH ::
Custom Search