“Alien” species are plants, animals (and others, including pathogens) invading an environment and either settling in among the natives fairly peacefully, or (much more rarely) running riot. It’s an entirely natural process, which would be happening routinely even if there were no humans on the planet—it’s just part of the way the natural world, and its evolution through time, happens. Since humans have been around though, transporting plants and animals by both accident and design, it’s become far more commonplace until today “…we live in a new geological era in which nothing is undisturbed and most ecosystems are a hotch-potch of native and alien species…”
   The received wisdom (among conservationists at least) is essentially “natives good, aliens bad”; that invasive species should be rooted out again and this alien tide held back at all costs. But there’s also a newer, very different, view and long-time environmental-science journalist Fred Pearce is among those now championing it. In The New Wild he first gives us examples of invasions, from Ascension and the Hawaiian islands to Australia, San Francisco Bay, the Black Sea…all over the globe in fact: the water hyacinth, jellyfish, rabbits, algae, zebra mussels and Japanese knotweed are among the more familiar perceived offenders. Then there’s a section describing the (well-meaning) efforts of conservationists to perform what he calls “ecological cleansing”, the eradication of foreign species, and the various reasons these efforts are rarely successful. In the final part he outlines the newer attitude, what he calls “the new wild”.
   A couple of examples give a taste of the sort of thing Pearce is talking about. The Black Sea was already a highly toxic and sewage-choked sump, ripe for invasion by any species (in this case a kind of jellyfish) which could stand to live in it. The invaders, in other words, are often opportunists rather than destroyers, able to thrive in an environment made suitable for them by us humans. They also commonly act as scapegoats: rabbits are blamed for the damage to Australia’s outback actually wreaked by the millions of sheep introduced there by the farmers doing the blaming.
   Pearce’s claim overall is that, seen in proper perspective, there’s really no such thing as either a “native” or “alien” species and the whole idea of there being a “balance of nature”, too, is a myth; all ecosystems are in constant flux; change is, and has always been, the norm. All this, he says, has more to do with human psychology than real ecology: it may be a very human (and understandable) emotion to want to stop the clock and preserve everything the way it is right now, but a human emotion is all it is.
   The book is packed with both ecological and historical facts (and Pearce drops in one or two along the way which some readers might find shocking: the stuff about the “pristine” and iconic tropical rainforests of Amazonia, Congo and even Borneo having been extensively farmed not so long ago for instance!) On the one hand, it’s worth keeping in mind that he is giving us only one side of an argument here. But on the other, whether I agree with him overall or not, this certainly did make me go back to the basics and think it all through afresh—very interesting read. ( )

This is a very informative book. The writing is a bit dry, but very easy to understand and absorb. The authors ideas and perspective provide hope for the planet, with or without the human race. ( )

A must read for anyone interested in conservation or ecology. So interesting. I now think differently about it all. ( )

I seem to have unintentionally gotten into a "how should humanity address current ecological concerns" kick this year, as The New Wild continues on themes previously touched on in [b:Resurrection Science: Conservation, De-extinction and the Precarious Future of Wild Things|23848047|Resurrection Science Conservation, De-extinction and the Precarious Future of Wild Things|M.R. O'Connor|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1430945113s/23848047.jpg|43458049] and [b:The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History|17910054|The Sixth Extinction An Unnatural History|Elizabeth Kolbert|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1372677697s/17910054.jpg|25095506]. The New Wild doesn't tread the exact same paths as the other books, as Sixth Extinction depicted a rather morose view of the anthropocene and Resurrection Science examined ways we try to mitigate what we've caused. Instead, The New Wild considers the ecosystems we have now: a mix of native and non-native species in a constantly changing environment.

[a:Fred Pearce|5921|Fred Pearce|https://s.gr-assets.com/assets/nophoto/user/m_50x66-82093808bca726cb3249a493fbd3bd0f.png] is rather pointed about challenging the orthodoxy of typical conservation- he posits there are no 'pristine' ecosystems and what we often think of as pristine have still been shaped by humanity for thousands of years, so why try to preserve a fixed point in time when nature is constantly changing? Various examples of invasives filling in niches of native plants that were wiped out because of people are placed in context as providing habitat/food/etc. for endangered species native to the area, or how something that can be endangered in one place is considered invasive in another. Pearce bolsters his argument by pointing out how shaky some of the statistics and numbers used to vilify invasives are.

It's a persuasive argument. I'm not convinced it should be taken whole cloth (as it could easily slide to "Oh, well, nature will recover so let's go ahead and build this new farm or whatever"), but nuances are certainly needed for conservation efforts. ( )

What if our current thinking regarding native plants and animals was wrong? What if the idea of "pristine" environments was a myth? What if invasive species weren't always bad for ecosystems, but might actually be helpful? Fred Pearce, an environmental journalist, has written a controversial and provocative book where he suggests exactly that - that Nature has been dealing with natural and man-made changes in its own way for a long time, and new species have usually been a part of that.

Pearce begins by telling about Ascension Island which had mostly been a barren rock until European settlers brought their favorite plants and animals (as well as a number of not-so-favorites). What exists now is a thriving and mostly non-native ecosystem. Pearce also discusses many of the most notorious 'invasives' and in some cases the story is much more nuanced than I had realized. I'd heard of the enormous problems the water hyacinth had caused in Africa's Lake Victoria, but Pearce points out that a likely reason for the plant's extreme success there was the massive human-caused pollution - and suggested that the plant was actually helping to heal the lake. He cites a very wet El Nino year where the lake was flushed out and the water hyacinth disappeared (although he says it appears to be coming back).

Not all of his discussions were so interesting - and I thought his suggested uses of kudzu vine (gourmet jams and soaps) were pretty lame. In fairness, however, Pearce DOES NOT say we should embrace all non-native species (although he probably should have said that more than once or twice in the book). But his discussions on how there really are no pristine environments around the world was especially fascinating. Perhaps I've just been primed to read that with my recent reading but that actually made a lot of sense. (I have recently read [b:Engineering Eden|26891330|Engineering Eden The True Story of a Violent Death, a Trial, and the Fight over Controlling Nature|Jordan Fisher Smith|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1453057841s/26891330.jpg|46942267] by Jordan Fisher Smith which shows the non-natural state of our National Parks, as well as [b:Nature Wars|13533785|Nature Wars The Incredible Story of How Wildlife Comebacks Turned Backyards into Battlegrounds|Jim Sterba|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1344370389s/13533785.jpg|19095471] by Jim Sterba, of which the first section discusses the evolution of much of the US East Coast from farmland to forests.)

Although I am not an ecologist I found this a very interesting and thought-provoking book. I'm not sure embracing all non-natives is the wisest course of action, but it's certainly made me wonder about some of the 'generally-accepted-wisdom' I'm used to hearing and reading. (I received a free copy of this book from the GR First Reads program.) ( )