IMO driving such activities underground is really something to be feared as the consequences are much severe then the mere banning of something that is undesirable. Withholding of vital information during a pandemic outbreak is the prefect kindling for a fire.
If there is a growing population of people in China that is against eating wildlife then such bans would be unnecessary and at worse will just polarize the population into different groups that refuses to cooperate.
Or, the much greater efforts needed to acquire illegal animal products may end up causing the people that used to consume them to give up due to the extra hassle and cost and work needed to acquire it compared to before, not to mention the risk of consequences being judged as not worth whatever tiny gain it is to seek to acquire and consume them... leading to an overall massive net reduction of the consumption of these animal products in the first place.
Correct me if you're wrong, but the impression I get from you is that you believe the people who currently consume these animal products do so out of some kind of strong alignment or commitment to that culture or identity? If so, then I would argue that consumption of those animal products is a choice as a result of societal shaping/education (and lack of societal shaping/education) as well as the access and lack of access of other more normal staple meat products which in turn stem from past poverty.
I do not believe there is anywhere near that level of "commitment" in the vast majority of people who consume those animal products nor is it a particularly central part of their identity.
