Slashdot Mirror


Should We Eat Invasive Species?

The Washington Post's Energy & Environment section raises today the question of whether the best way to control certain invasive species is to eat them. The biggest success story on this front in the U.S. has been the lionfish; it destroys the habitat of some other fish in the areas where it's been introduced, but it turns out to be a palatable food fish, too. Its population has gone down since the start of a concerted effort to encourage it as a food, rather than just a nuisance. The article touches on invasive species of fish and crustaceans, but also land animals and plants. I know that garlic mustard (widespread in eastern U.S. forests) is tasty, and so are the blackberries all over Seattle.

20 of 290 comments (clear)

  1. On that note by rmdingler · · Score: 5, Funny

    Let's hope the rest of the earth's species don't adopt this plan to control the invasive naked apes.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:On that note by TrekkieGod · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let's hope the rest of the earth's species don't adopt this plan to control the invasive naked apes.

      I assure you that they try. All the time.

      We're not at the top of the food chain because the other species are nice to us. Or because we're nice, for that matter.

      --

      Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

    2. Re:On that note by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let's hope the rest of the earth's species don't adopt this plan to control the invasive naked apes.

      At a population level, the reverse might actually be true:

      One of the few tactics that any species large enough to gun down faster than it can reproduce, or touchy enough that you can just set its habitat on fire, can embrace to survive, and even thrive, is to be docile and tasty. Humans go crazy for that, and promptly allocate massive amounts of effort, and delicious calories, to encouraging your population to increase dramatically. Sure, then they put a captive-bolt stunner into your brain and chop you up for parts; but being a darwinian winner isn't about quality of life...

    3. Re:On that note by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Let's hope the rest of the earth's species don't adopt this plan to control the invasive naked apes.

      Homo sapiens is pretty tough prey. We're tough enough catch and kill on an individual basis, on a group basis it becomes virtually impossible, even if you take away our technology.

      The only predators that can kill humans in comparative safety are ambush predators (salt water crocodiles) and predators more adapted to their environment than we are (sharks). The former are probably the biggest man eaters on the planet and the latter don't regard us as optimal prey, because we're not energy dense enough for them (insert obese American joke here) when compared to their preferred prey.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    4. Re:On that note by houghi · · Score: 4, Funny

      We are NOT on top of the foodchain. The housecat is. They have us trained to bring them food.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    5. Re:On that note by ArcadeMan · · Score: 4, Funny

      Other example: my roommate.

    6. Re:On that note by Jmc23 · · Score: 5, Funny
      Yeah, a bunch of zombies walking around staring at the tiny screens in their hands while wearing earbuds. Real tough prey there.

      The only way humans would survive is IF you took their tech away!

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    7. Re:On that note by qwak23 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So without our defining characteristics, we're easy prey? Of course! Our intellect and its products (technology, shared learning, etc) are exactly what make us tough prey. Throwing someone into the wilderness of Alaska naked is not a realistic proposition, aside from the fact that our bodies aren't adapted to the cold (again, clothing is technology, and part of who we are), it's akin to taking away a snakes fangs and throwing them back into the wild.

      Some animals are born with physical defenses, some animals are born with the mental capacity to build physical defenses. The former are limited to the environments where their physical characteristics give them some advantage, the latter can put themselves in virtually any environment. Sure, some individuals would fare worse than others, but we wouldn't have spread to every corner of the planet without that ability.

    8. Re:On that note by Kittenman · · Score: 4, Funny

      Have you ever eaten squirrel? Stringy, gamy as hell and hardly any real meat to speak of.

      ... and the portions are so small.

      caution: may contain nuts

      --
      "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
  2. blackberries in seattle? I'm Shocked. Shocked by goombah99 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    every year seattlites eat all the blackberries they can pick. The only thing that cut that down was when people began spraying them. But you cold not possibly get more people eating them, and that didn't dent the population in 50 years. On the otherhand no thinks of them as invasive in the sense they were not natural to live there. the pacifc northwest is berry country. Just a thorny nuisance you have to keep cut back when it encroaches walkways not unlike choking vines on trees.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  3. Or.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Make their parts 'magical', like rhino horn and tiger penis.

  4. I'd go farther. Eat endangered species by Karmashock · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not in the wild but cultivated.

    The cow, the chicken, the pig... these animals have no natural habitat anymore really... yet are in no danger of dying of. Neither for that matter is the domesticated dog or the house cat or the gold fish.

    All small endangered animals can be bred as pets or food. By all means, protect their habitat in the wild but that is no guarantee that they will survive as a species. Maintain them as pets or food in our society though and they'll live as long as we continue to do that.

    As for large animals... encourage farmers to take care of a couple. Seriously, a cattle rancher could take in a few rhinos. Have a special pen for them. Make the whole thing tax deductible until there's some way to recoup the cost. These people breed BILLIONS of animals in captivity. We could do the same with rhinos, elephants, etc.

    Right now one of the things hurting these species is that its very hard to legally own them.

    An animal that belongs to no one will not be protected. We've seen this in Africa where the wild animals are prey for poachers. However, if you give the animals to the local villages and make the animal's survival the villager's responsibility they suddenly stop getting eaten or killed for their ivory.

    This is the solution.

    Anything else will likely harm these species more, waste time, waste money, and accomplish very little.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  5. Re:blackberries in seattle? I'm Shocked. Shocked by demonlapin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There is a solution to this problem: goats. Turn all that thorny nuisance into yummy meat and cheese.

  6. Nutria by spudnic · · Score: 4, Informative

    They tried this a couple of decades ago in South Louisiana with the nutria. It turns out people weren't waiting in line to eat real life ROUSes. (Rodents Of Unusual Size)

    Now the state offers a $5 bounty per nutria tail turned in.

    --
    load "linux",8,1
  7. Re:blackberries in seattle? I'm Shocked. Shocked by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Given that 'being eaten' is the plan for plants that go to considerable metabolic expense to produce attractive fruits or berries, those probably aren't good candidates for this strategy. (Admittedly, humans probably excrete more of the seeds into the water treatment plant than birds do, so they probably aren't the ideal customer; but fruits are still the deliberately expendable seed carriers, not life-critical components.)

  8. Re:blackberries in seattle? I'm Shocked. Shocked by IonOtter · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Blackberries can be controlled, you just have to invest a little time. Basically? When you pick, tie a small ribbon on the branch you got it from. At the end of the growing season, cut out anything with a ribbon on it, because that vine will never produce fruit again, it will only become a "stringer", which spreads to produce more vines.

    This way, the plant can be controlled and kept to one area. But again, you have to invest time, which not many people have a lot of these days.

    --
    [End Of Line]
  9. Re:Himalayan Blackberries by wezelboy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I loathe the Himalayan Blackberry. The berries, while large and numerous, are bland. They store a lot of energy in their roots quickly, so once they get a foothold, they send out shoots everywhere- especially after you cut them back.

    Goats are the best remedy. I had a single goat clear an acre of 8-10' tall bramble in a span of a few months. For good. They eat new shoots as soon as they appear until the blackberry roots have expended all their stored energy.

    If you don't have a goat, then you must remain vigilant. I have a zero tolerance policy towards blackberries. If I see one on my property, it dies.

  10. How about evangelical Christians? by AndyKron · · Score: 4, Funny

    Can we eat evangelical Christians? They're pretty invasive.

  11. Re:blackberries in seattle? I'm Shocked. Shocked by freeze128 · · Score: 4, Funny

    That sounds pretty complicated. I would just install a Blackberry Enterprise Server, and that would easily control all my blackberries.

  12. Re:Give Me More by hey! · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Frankly i think the fight against most invasive species simply creates jobs for public employees.

    That's easy to think because it's easy to forget about the species that we used to have, but don't any longer.I'm old, so I do remember the species we used to have back in the 60s. but are long gone, like the rock crab, which is way better eating than the tiny Asian shore crab that displaced it.

    Another thing to remember is that Florida is a very big state, so if you simply list all the edible invasive animals, it seems like a cornucopia. But if you look at the situation in habitat by habitat, the situation looks different.The problem these things is that they don't have native predators -- they overwhelm the resources within a habitat. That means you lose everything else in that habitat that was dependent, directly or indirectly, on resources consumed by the exotic. That includes many desirable native species.

    Take Tilapia. Of course the're edible, they're a popular aquaculture fish, but they're not *great* eating. They're like tofu: it's all about what you cook them *with*. When they take over a body of water, they displace native fish that are actually *better* eating. So instead of a nice bass, you end up catching a mediocre white fish you can buy cheaper than bait at the supermarket anyway.

    Or Asian carp. They are indeed edible, in fact good if you know how to prepare them, but they also displace many, many desirable native gamefish: bass, crappie, catfish, trout and salmon, all of which are superb eating. For a whole list of edible animals you might not be aware of, you get one in their place. That's a raw deal.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.