Growing up in an Asian household (I feel like this common for Asians), my parents undeniably influenced me to be frugal. Through taking my red packets for savings, emphasising on prices, discounts and reusability, buying shoes/clothes too big for me saying I’ll grow into them and the list goes on… Just killing invaders feels “wasteful” to me so what if we ate invaders? Instead of a life gone wasted, it can be nourishment for us and at the same time possibly offset the economic loss resulted from invasive species?
Drawing by me and the image of the lionfish is taken from Pixabay
I mean we can eat cows, pigs, chickens, goats and a huge variety of seafood, why not feral cats, lionfish or pigeons? It is well-known that animals on factory farms are treated poorly and live in poor conditions through the distribution of slaughterhouse videos on social media. Yet many still consume meat, probably because we do not see how they are butchered right before consumption, with the meat readily separated from the animals for us. So, if an invasive species is presented nicely on a plate would you eat it? But then again, it all boils down to what society tells us what is fit for consumption. Speciesism is definitely prevalent in our dietary habits as certain animals are anthropomorphised in our society and we tend to view them more compassionately (PETA, last accessed 23 October 2020). Naturally, we would feel icky at the thought of eating them. While other animals are viewed lesser than other animals and we believe it’s okay to mistreat or eat them (PETA, last accessed 23 October 2020). If it is more socially acceptable to consume safe to eat invaders, would this be an effective method to curb the spread of invaders?
Such a way to control invasive species population can be seen with lionfish. Check out this video below!
But, it may fail, when invasive species become a threatened species (Snyder, 2017). As the consumption for invasive species increases, it incentivises people to hunt for them until the supply is limited or even worse – there’s no supply (Snyder, 2017).
Ultimately, I think that solely eating invaders to reduce its population size would be difficult as for it to work, mortality rate must exceed the birth rate. But, eating invaders can definitely help to contribute to the control of spread.
I’d like to end it off with this quote!
“If we can hunt native species to extinction, as we have for eons, why not deploy our insatiable appetites against invaders?”
Joe Roman
References
Snyder, 2017 retrieved from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-we-really-eat-invasive-species-into-submission/
PETA, last accessed 23 October 2020 retrieved from https://www.peta.org/features/what-is-speciesism/
Hi Lixuan!
It’s certainly an ingenious method to be eating invasive species to curb their population growth. But as you’ve rightly pointed out, incentivising people to hunt them might’ve unintended consequences. It made me think about the extinction of the thylacines, whereby the Tasmanian government placed a £1 bounty for each adult thylacine. The resulting overhunting and the introduction of dingoes (incidentally another invasive species) eventually led to the demise of the species. Hence, do you think incentivising invasive species is a risky move, as it may also encourage overhunting in the species’ natural habitat?
Hi Yuxun, thanks for dropping by!
Wow, thank you for sharing the article, it was an interesting read.
I think it is a risky move considering we live in a consumerist society. There’s a chance that an edible invader would gain popularity which comes along with an increase in demand. They wouldn’t just magically stop consuming invaders once it is successful. Furthermore, with demand, it creates a market, farms would probably be created to keep up with the demands. This could backfire as profits incentives may encourage the spread of invaders.
However for this method to be effective, in the case of invasive fishes, every month at least 27% of a total population have to be eaten. That is a lot of fish to eat and a lot of people to appeal to. So, it may be even difficult for an invader to even reach that level of demand in the first place…
I think that we should approach this method really carefully!
References
https://medium.com/@jacqueline.v.hurwitz/eating-invasive-fish-doesnt-solve-a-problem-it-creates-another-one-da5ec6e822b9
https://ensia.com/voices/why-eating-invasive-species-is-a-bad-idea/
Hi Lixuan,
I love this idea, talk about killing two birds with one stone, it is actually surprising that this has not been implemented earlier. This reminds me of when people tried to push for the consumption of ray filets when they believed that the cownose rays in the Chesapeake Bay were causing scallop populations to fall in the area.
You also mentioned how speciesism might affect our dietary habits, and how certain animals are anthropomorphized making them less appealing to us. I was wondering if this applied similarly to invasive species, as these species are usually considered “unnatural” and thus would not be as beloved as native species are (I would think). If this was the case then should it not be easier for us to eat the invasive species. What are you thoughts on this?
PS. I thought your drawing with the lionfish was really cute too
Thanks,
Mark
Hey Mark!
Thanks for visiting my blog! Hm, I see where you’re coming from. I think that it is probable if the appearance or the background of the meal is not taken into consideration. But I think that for many when they think about invasive species, they think of ugly and dangerous to eat. The association with such negative characteristics would influence one’s expectation of how the food would taste. It’s like with junk food, we know it’s tasty and it becomes etched into our mind and we are more inclined to consume them because of the positive associations!
So, I don’t think many would be willing to consume invaders.
And thank you so much for the compliment 😆