Are All Invasive Species Bad?

Non-native species unfairly get a bad rap according to a new study

August 31, 2011 RSS Feed Print

By Carrie Arnold, ISNS Contributor

(ISNS)—The pages of ecological history are filled with woeful tales of destruction from non-native species—organisms that originated elsewhere.

Kudzu, a fast-growing vine imported from Japan, now chokes out many native plants across the southern United States, Zebra mussels native to the Caspian Sea have reduced the food supplies of native fishes in the Great Lakes, and rats imported to New Zealand have decimated the native bird populations.

Examples of the damages caused by these so-called "invasive species" are seemingly as endless as the amount of battles waged against them.

But are all non-native species bad?

Biologist Mark Davis says no. Davis, a professor from Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota, believes it's time to raise the white flag against non-native species. Most non-native species, he said, are harmless—or even helpful.

In a letter published in the journal Nature this past June, Davis and 18 other ecologists argued that these destructive invasive species—or those non-native species that cause ecological or economic harm—are only a tiny subset of non-native species, and that this tiny fraction has basically given all new arrivals a bad name.

Take Devil's claw—a plant that produces hooked pods for increased seed dispersal—which was imported to the Australian outback during the 19th century as a horticultural oddity. Despite research failing to show that the species has any significant effects on local biodiversity or nutrient cycling, the government has spent the last 20 years trying to remove this plant from the Australian landscape. Efforts that according to Davis are an unwise use of scarce resources that automatically target non-native species simply because they're newly arrived immigrants.

"What's native and non-native is quite arbitrary," Davis said. "It depends on what time in the past a species has to have been there to be considered native, and everything after that is non-native. Unless a species evolved in a particular site, all species are ultimately introduced."

Many of the species we see as part of the quintessential American landscape—honeybees, earthworms, and even the amber waves of grain celebrated in song—are actually imports from Europe. Davis said that most species arrive from somewhere else, so someone's definition of "native" depends on how far back they turn the clock. Turn it back far enough, and essentially every living organism could fit the definition.

The origin of a species may not tell you everything about it, said University of Tennessee - Knoxville ecologist Dan Simberloff, but it tells you a lot. The very next month, Simberloff and 141 fellow ecologists published a formal objection, also published in Nature, to the Davis group original piece.

If a non-native species lacks natural predators in their new environment and is able to find suitable food and habitat, their numbers can skyrocket -- the hallmark of an invasive species. This sudden takeover can leave native species with no food and no place to live. Such population growth and expansion of non-native species to invasive status can take years, sometimes generations until the conditions are just right or if the initial colonizations fail. But once a non-native species turns invasive, there's no going back. Invasive species are remarkably hard to expel from their new locale once they establish themselves.

Also, Simberloff said that plenty of native species are pesky and harmful, but they rarely cause the large-scale damage done by non-native species. In that sense, it's both fair and prudent to act quickly and decisively against newly arrived species—but this move is less about mistrust of non-native species and more about trying to prevent damage from a potential invasive species.

According to Simberloff, of the 7,000 estimated non-native species present in North America, approximately 1,000 are considered invasive. Clearly, invasive species are in the minority, but their small numbers don't keep them from causing hundreds of billions of dollars in economic and ecological harm. If researchers waited to evaluate the harm caused by a non-native species, as Davis proposed, conservation managers would lose valuable time in which to act.

Tags:
plants,
animals

Reader Comments Read all comments (4)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Thankyou for killing our wildlife and making the world safer for mankind. I dont know what I would do knowing that deer and elk were living free on an island away from human habitation and civilization. There was no need for an impact study as there were no native species to be impacted. If eagles eat all the foxes it should surely cut down the eagle population to a safe level so that island visitors can bring their pets for a day hike.Since the foxes are gone there will be no impact on them from dogs, and human waste will be collected in portable latrines I am sure. It will be a nice form off income for the park service-until rodent infestations occur and cause the destruction of the ecosystem.

harrold of CA 8:21AM February 19, 2012

THE DOGMATIC THEOLOGY OF ENVIRONMENTALISM

The Conservancy on Catalina Island is currently engaged in killing all the raccoons on the island. They claim they are "nonnative". They've already killed all the pigs and goats, and have sterilized the few remaining buffalo

A few years ago, the Conservancy brought in professional hunters and more than 40 hunting dogs to track down non native pigs and goats. These dogs roamed over every square mile of the island. A few months later the foxes began to die of distemper. In all more than 90% of the cherished, and allegedly "native" Island Foxes died.

Soon after gaining total possession of the Channel Islands, the “Nature Conservancy” and the National Park Service began eradicating all the nonnative species on Santa Cruz Island - leaving only the Golden Eagle and Island Fox. With nothing else left to eat the eagles ate the foxes. To the horror of the Park Service, the fox populations were diminished by about 95% - from over 2000 in 1995, to fewer than 135 by 1999. Another “success story” courtesy of the myopic Green Police.

It’s interesting to note that the Island Fox populations flourished under the benign neglect of the former owners who ranched and ran a hunting club, but were nearly wiped out by the Environmentalist PhD’s. Ensconced in ideological hubris, I doubt the Park Service or Nature Conservancy even noted the irony.

I also observe that the National Park Service is currently wrapping up 2 years of cutting down hundreds of “nonnative trees” on Santa Cruz Island. It seems only “pre-Columbian” life is “natural” and “pure”, and worthy of protection.

On Santa Rosa Island the Park Service is killing all the deer, sheep, elk and goats - their "Final Solution" should be completed by Jan. 2012.

Surely these environmentalists must know that nearly all of the thousands of islands in the Pacific ocean are homes to hundreds of nonnative species? From South East Asia to Hawaii these islands are populated by nonnative plants and animals, all cohabitating in illicit harmony.

For thousands of years, all types of life were borne to these island shores by, floating logs, mats of kelp, the wind, waves, currents and the boats of men. Yes, men - men who are themselves a rightful part of “nature” - rather than something set apart from it.

By what “green ethic “ do these environmentalists decide what animals or plants rightfully belong in a place? As thousands of islands in the Pacific attest - nature adapts and is made richer and more diverse in the process. Didn’t the Island Fox come to California’s offshore islands by either floating trees or by the boats of men? And so, also perhaps the raccoon...

GOING GREEN HAS GONE TOTALLY MAD

R.L. Schaefer of CA 4:23PM September 25, 2011

No but Mankind is.

2its of CO 1:39AM September 21, 2011

National Science Foundation

NSF

Science of Spatial Learning

Center seeks to transform teaching practices.

Studying Carbon in Rivers

Researcher explores physical, chemical and biological interactions.

Challenge: Quantum Computers

CAREER awardee focuses on what they can and cannot do.

advertisement

Science Discoveries

Science Discoveries

iTunes icon RSS icon

advertisement