Invasive Species as Bioterror Agents?

There is a little thing going around the internet today about the danger of invasive species being used as bio-terror agents.

Um, no. This makes no sense at all. While invasive species could be introduced as a form of ecological vandalism, none of the examples offered would even remotely meet the definition of 'terrorism.'

Terrorism is the commission of acts of violence against civilian targets for the purpose of promoting an atmosphere of fear among civilians, in order to achieve other political aims. Nobody is going to be hiding in their closets because of wheat rust.

This gentleman who is trying to sound the alarm, Lawrence Roberge, said the following:

"In the hands of a rogue nation, terrorists, or an individual bent on destruction, an invasive species could have an affect similar to better known potential biological weapons such as smallpox or anthrax."

No. None of the examples given would do this. There is a world of difference between a fatal or potentially fatal disease killing human beings when people can clearly see that this was imposed on them by an enemy through something like the anthrax mailings of 2001, versus some virus that is killing deer or a parasite that reduces the wheat crop over a period of successive years. Invasive species can produce substantial economic damage but that is not the same thing as terrorism.

What Roberge is describing is a form of asymmetrical warfare. But its not really terrorism. Terrorism is a form of asymmetrical warfare, but all asymmetrical warfare is not terrorism.

Roberge recently completed a study on invasive species and naturally his conclusion here is that we need to spend more money on studies. Frankly, I'm fed up with studies on invasive species (although I have not looked at the specifics of Roberge's research and am not prepared to say that it isn't worthwhile). Usually the studies go on and on for years and the conclusion always seems to be that we need more studies. Personally, I think that at least half of every public dollar spent on dealing with invasive species should be spent specifically on eradication instead of year after year of research while the problem gets worse. Research is good but it seems to have often come at the cost of real action.

All of that said, invasive species could very easily be used for asymmetrical warfare. The trouble is that many applications could eventually backfire on the saboteur. It would be very easy to go tit for tat with something like this, and even without it being done deliberately, the species in question could end up being accidentally introduced to crops or habitat of the saboteur's country or allies.

Frankly, I think that so many species are being constantly introduced and moved around the United States on their own already that the deliberate introduction of harmful invasives might just be a drop in the bucket.

[Photo copyright 2011 by Jackson Landers]