goldmine

Honolulu, Hawaii, is famous for its beaches and the kind of paradise landscapes you dream of when planning your vacation. A few weeks ago, however, one of its most picturesque beaches hosted a contest that sounded like anything but paradise: “Eat the Invaders” (“Eat the invaders”). Although the title may be shocking macabre, in reality it was a fishing tournament in which participants had to capture three invasive species. Then a chef was in charge of preparing them to demonstrate that, in addition to being a huge environmental problem, fish ta’ape, to‘ouch either roi They can be a delicacy. It seems like an anecdote, but that Honolulu tournament is just part of a much bigger problem: the ‘invasivorism‘. What the hell is ‘invasiveness’? The word is confusing, but it refers to a very easy concept to understand: the ‘invasiveness’ It consists of neither more nor less than consuming invasive species. Exactly what encouraged to do a few weeks ago in Honolulu: stop seeing ta’ape or roi as simple invasive species and understand them as something more, an ingredient for delicious dishes. In theory, this does not mean that we give up eradicating them or ignore the damage they cause to local ecosystems. It is simply encouraged to go further and turn the problem into an opportunity. Does it only happen in Hawaii? Not at all. Honolulu residents haven’t invented anything new. Not even the slogan of “Eat the Invaders”, which is actually the title of a series from the ABC network that explores precisely the culinary potential of Australia’s invasive species. In 2025 even the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) used that same hook (“Eat the invaders”) to launch a campaign that encouraged taking advantage of species introduced by man and that now threaten native diversity. “Consumption of invasive species can help protect native fauna and flora. By trapping, trapping and consuming them we can reduce their population and the damage they cause,” claims an article signed by Erin Huggins, from the FWS communications area, which details half a dozen species that represent a problem in the US and “should be considered”: Myocastor coypus, Channa argus, iguana iguanasilver carp and Sus scrofacreatures from other areas of America, Asia or Europe. Sounds good, right? That’s the crux of the matter. At first glance it seems like squaring the circle: an invasive species is combated and in the process a benefit is easily transferred to the entire population. The idea is so powerful that in 2013 even the FAO encouraged fighting jellyfish plagues with a similar slogan: “If you can’t fight them, eat them.” The problem is that there are experts who believe that invasiveness is actually a trap that is tantalizingly easy to fall into. At first it seems like the perfect solution, but it often ends up aggravating the invasions. The issue is of sufficient concern that a group of scientists from several countries, led by the Doñana-CSIC Biological Station, has published an article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) in which he questions the basic argument of invasiveness: that the consumption of invasive species is an intelligent strategy, especially if it ends up turning the capture and exploitation of those same species into a lucrative business. “Encouraging commercialization can create incentives to maintain them instead of eradicating them.” What do they say exactly? That what at first seems like a solution can end up becoming a problem. “Invasivorism is usually presented as a strategy win-win (mutual benefit) based on the idea that the consumption of an invasive species generates wealth while minimizing its impacts”, recognize Fran Officialdegui, researcher at the Doñana-CSIC Biological Station and main author of the article. “But the reality is much more complex, and in many situations, when the problem becomes a business, a resistance to ending it arises.” “What is not often said is that the objectives of commercial exploitation and management of invasive species are, in most cases, opposite,” affects the researcher before warning of the greatest risk: that a market will be generated around foreign species. When this happens to the interest in eradicating them, another that pulls in the opposite direction can be added: the interest in conserving them. Can that really happen? It has already happened, in fact. In their article, the researchers recall the case of the Kamchatka crab (Paralithodes camtschaticus). Although it is a species native to the North Pacific, about 60 years ago the USSR decided to introduce it to the Barents Sea, in the Arctic. There these crustaceans found a place where they could easily expand and ended up becoming a pest. Also in something else: the engine of a prosperous business that over time led to overexploitation. What did the authorities do when fishing threatened to eliminate the theoretically invasive species? Catch limits were set to guarantee the business that had been created. Why are they issuing the warning now? Because, as they remember from the Doñana-CSIC Biological Station, the discourse of invasiveness seems to be settling little by little. And in part this expansion is due to campaigns promoted by companies, administrations and even conservation organizations that are carried away by the motto of “If you can’t beat them, eat them!” that already used years ago the FAO. Officialdegui also warns that what happened in his day with the Kamchatka crab could be replicated in Spain with the Callinectes sapidusor blue crab, a invasive species whose goodness culinary now they start promoting themselves. In fact it is easy to find recipes that explain how to prepare it with rice. “It is very likely that scenarios similar to that of the Kamchatka crab will occur on the peninsula when, once the commercial exploitation of the blue crab is established (Callinectes sapidus), there are declines in its population”, keep it up Officialdegui. In his opinion, invasiveness can help raise social awareness about the risk of exotic species, but that cannot mislead us. “Addressing biological invasions requires long-term commitment, scientific knowledge and coordinated … Read more