Invasivory, the human consumption of invasive species, is gaining popularity as an invasive species’ management tool. Because humans have historically been effective at harvesting and extirpating populations of native species, some argue we could positively channel human consumption of speciesfor a ‘win-win’ outcome that would benefit ecosystems and our appetites. Invasivory could help manage biological invasions while boosting local economies, providing new sources of food, and raising awareness of the problems posed by invasive species. However, there are also critiques of invasivory that suggest unintended consequences of creating food markets may lead to harmful outcomes. These critiques include legal and demographic barriers while risking economic attachment and further spread of invasive species. Thus, many proponents and opponents of invasivory agree that invasivores should collate information on legal, biological, and economic aspects of invasive species before initiating an “invasivory campaign”. Here, we provide a comprehensive evaluation 45 common nonnative invasive species in the continental U.S. that have been promoted as candidates for invasivory. We assess the following questions: 1) Are there legal barriers that would hinder an invasivory campaign?; 2) Are demographic population models available for the species; and 3) Do economic markets exist for the species?
Results/Conclusions
We found federal and state legal barriers were present for 66% (n=30) of examined species, which could restrictthe sale, transportation, or harvest of invasive species. Additionally, only 33% (n=15) of the invasive species had demographic population models available, which indicates uncertainties about effective market size. When available, demographic models suggested that substantially large numbers of individuals would need to be harvested on an annual basis in order to reduce population growth rates, indicating that invasivory campaigns would need to be large and robust to effectively reduce invader population sizes. Finally, while we found that food markets currently exist for 71% (n=32) of the evaluated species, only 40% (n=13) are harvested from wild populations. The remainder are harvested from farmed (n=10) or unknown sources (n=9), indicating potential long-term economic attachment to these invasive species. Meanwhile, 38% (N=12) of invasive species sold as food products are potentially reproductive, which further increasesthe risk of invasive spread during transportation between producers and consumers. Our analysis shows that for some species there are potential barriers like legal restrictions or farmed-markets that may reduce the efficiacy of invasivory campaigns and that for many species more demographic data is necessary before creating invasivore markets.