For many of us, 2020 has been a roller coaster of a year from the Australian bushfires at the start of the year to the current ongoing pandemic. Our lives have all been impacted by the pandemic one way or another. Now, have you thought about how COVID-19 has impacted the wildlife trade? Did it improve conservation efforts towards illegal wildlife trade? Or did it create more avenues for illegal wildlife trade to happen? In the next few posts, we will be looking at how COVID-19 has positively and negatively impacted the wildlife trade.

COVID-19, like SARS and Ebola, has been identified as a zoonotic disease that spreads from animals to humans. While the source is not yet confirmed, it is hypothesized that the virus originated from bats, with pangolins as an intermediary host, in the wildlife markets in Wuhan. In an increasingly globalized world, the disease soon spread throughout at alarming rates. I remember hearing first about the virus in December and soon enough, it was a worldwide epidemic around February! Because of the spread, images with the negative association of the wildlife trade soon flooded social media such as the bad conditions of wildlife markets in china, bats in soup, and so on.

Example of the bat soup that circulated around in social media

Although it may not be true that consumption of bats caused the coronavirus, these sad images and videos may be the wake-up call that the world needed to stop the illegal wildlife trade and the consequences of it. With the impact of the pandemic so severe and widespread coupled with the negative connotations associated with wildlife trade, this may possibly lead to a decrease in demand for wildlife products. People may have a change in mindset and have less confidence obtaining and/or consuming wildlife products, reducing the trade. Moreover, because of the economic impacts of the pandemic, it may also reduce income and fewer people may be willing or able to spend purchasing illegal wildlife products, further reducing the trade.

Transport disruption such as airline closures may also reduce the trade as smuggling in passenger’s luggage was one of the main modes of transport for the trade (Just look at the cat in the bag! Not the good kind.). Although they may reduce the trade, these economic factors might just be short-term changes until the economy recovers.

Additionally, the severity has also caught the attention of legislations! From previous posts, we know how important legislations can be to stop the wildlife trade, and hence, with authorities involved, it may reduce wildlife trade further. In late February, the National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China prohibited commercial breeding and trade of most non-domesticated animals for consumption in late February. A big step in tackling the issue of wildlife trade as previously only the consumption of protected species was banned. The wildlife protection law in China is also being revised and the revision is said to be released by the end of the year.

While all these may seem like a step forward, the same species banned for consumption were not banned for medicine.  This could potentially lead to blur lines between legal and illegal wildlife trade and the pandemic may not be as good as we thought in combating illegal wildlife trade. Moreover, China isn’t the only country involved in wildlife trade and all countries involved need a change in legislation to better protect and conserve wildlife. Tune in as the next post will discuss more the negative implications of COVID-19 and the wildlife trade.

—

It is also important to note, that these images and wildlife consumption only portrays a few communities and may not be an accurate representation of China as a whole.