Invasive species also were predominantly (and legislated as such) about how it affected economic (agricultural) growth over any sort of ecosystem effects. It’s

Invasive species also were predominantly (and legislated as such) about how it affected economic (agricultural) growth over any sort of ecosystem effects. It’s why some birds, despite not being harmful to humans, are considered invasive species because they’ll eat crops. It gets turned into a money situation, where their existence now has to be justified through the millions of dollars of “damaged crops”. They then are killed by the hundreds of thousands, and an agenda gets pushed with very little backing evidence to support the demand for their death (like common startling birds “killing other birds”, when there isn’t much supporting research about that). What’s worse, there’s no global organization to tie countries together at least in terms of preservation. So in one country an animal could be considered endangered and in need of saving, and in another is treated as invasive and hunted down (often using brutal poisons from helicopters as it’s easier to spread). Imagine being killed because you and your family are doing better in another continent. It’s quite short term thinking. Thankfully, this “invasive” perspective in science is slowly going out of style. It’s far too rigid to be a meaningful lens to study the world through.