Tuna and tons of other fish are food sources and we don’t breed them. They just grow natively in sufficient numbers. Often invasive species don’t have a natural predator in the new ecosystem, so their population grows unchecked.
Why use CRISPR, birth control, nest culling or other methods which cost resources instead of eating them which is a net gain in resources?
/https%3A%2F%2Ftf-cmsv2-smithsonianmag-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Ffiler_public%2F52%2F4b%2F524bf090-00ea-4348-b810-1e4e151c41a8%2F49122460068_97fb2122d6_k.jpg)
That doesn’t make them a food source. Also making them a food source would incentivize some one to breed or increase the extent population.
If we want to control the Python population we need to do so with CRISPR, or birth control, or nest culling.
Injecting a profit motive into controlling invasive species often does not work out. Look to wild boars, pigeons or lampreys for proof.
Tuna and tons of other fish are food sources and we don’t breed them. They just grow natively in sufficient numbers. Often invasive species don’t have a natural predator in the new ecosystem, so their population grows unchecked.
Why use CRISPR, birth control, nest culling or other methods which cost resources instead of eating them which is a net gain in resources?
Commerical fishing at the current scale is not sustainable
All the more reason to pursue food sources from existing invasive species like pythons.