Are invasive species really the new wild?

Challenging, and dangerous, but highly recommended.

I do not agree with most of what Pearce concludes, but he definitely raises some valid points about still common misconceptions (i.e. the myth of the pristine) and brings to the table topics that should be constantly re-evaluated (albeit better-researched and less biased). No two invasive cases are the same.

I like how the book challenges us to think outside the box, but I also think many concepts and ideas have been blurred or completely ignored in this book. I recommend reading it, but not taking it as a thoroughly researched recipe for our current and future behavior. It’s not. As far as I understood the author is not proposing deliberate introductions, but rather stopping investing in the eradication of species naturally expanding their range or accidentally introduced (or is this just what I wanted to see?). It’s a good discussion, I give it that, but I feel there’s not enough caution in this book which can lead to feeling it is okay to just do nothing about this (global) problem.

I also rescue the way he brings out how ecological thinking has changed through time, and how we now understand there’s no such thing as “balance” in nature nor “pristine” places. And although the overarching topic of “humans not liking change” is true, it should not be an excuse to ignore these issues. We might not like change, but we are, after all, capable of learning and practicing being more intentional.

Further rant on the invasive species topic:

In biology/ecology, it is no secret that many exotic species are not harmful, but the invasive ones (i.e. exotic species that DO cause economic, ecological, and/or human harm) that we know about so far have impacted local livelihoods to the extent that it seems disrespectful to simply say that it is okay because it is nature. Actually, we have created the spaces and conditions for these invasions to take place. It is even worse when these invasions have been deliberate and/or avoidable.

When you think about the myriad of exotic and invasive species worldwide, it seems easy to cherry-pick those who can support the idea that “they’re not really that bad”. Pearce mostly covered species which we’ve learned to live with (long-ago invasions) and learned how to take advantage of (like the water hyacinth), and even exotics that have no record of having caused any harm.

Often I got the feeling that the idea of conservation that Pearce has is the old-fashioned conservation that disregards human livelihoods (as opposed to modern conservation which is more concerned with the ecosystem health that can support local livelihoods sustainably without the detriment of local ecosystems and future generations). All in all, I think he portrays a very narrow idea of “human populations”, perhaps very white viewpoints, and disregards the different relationships to nature that different cultures around the world have. I get this might be out of the scope of the book, but if you’re going to spend over 200 pages on how the world should let invasives flourish, the way we use land throughout the globe should matter.

Restoration ecology is not anymore—and for a long time hasn’t been—about going back to how things were thousands of years ago, as Pearce states (at times). It is true, though, that restoration ecology is expensive, especially if there’s an added bonus of invasive species to control or eradicate. I agree with Pearce—and restoration ecologists, for that matter—that restoration and rewilding is not about restoring something the way it used to be X years ago. The investment in removing invasives might need some case-by-case analysis, but the idea of allowing introductions for this is dangerous. There’s just too much risk and unpredictability, and this book gives a feeling of “comfort” in doing nothing about this that can lead to more deliberate introductions.

I remain a bit confused, though, that for the first 249 pages there seemed to be even some promotion of invasives, but the last paragraph just states to let nature be nature. I agree that “there is no point in discussing what is natural and what is novel”, but it does matter when invasive species (deliberately) can put local livelihoods and ecosystem services at risk.

All in all, I highly recommend reading this book!