As a Bermudian, it's always a treat to randomly see something about Bermuda on UA-cam. As a birder, its even more awesome to see a piece about birds in Bermuda. I remember when i was younger, there would always be land crabs pancaked on the south shore road by passing cars, but ever since the mid 2000s, I couldn't tell you the last time I saw crabs anywhere near the numbers they used to be in, and almost exclusively in dunes near the beaches. Both the introduction of the herons as well as the conservation efforts of the Bermuda petrel (cahow) were headed by Dr. David Wingate who i've had the pleasure of meeting several times. Cahow chicks are some of the cutest little fluff balls of down I've ever had the joy of interacting with lol. Awesome work as always, Tsuki!
That's awesome I've always wanted to go to Bermuda it looks beautiful. I did talk very breifly about Dr. David Wingate in my last video on the Cahow, he really has done some amazing work.
@@TsukiCove Would be awesome if you could pop over at any time! They do tours of Nonsuch Island where the cahow nests are, in the spring, if that's something you'd be interested in. But any other reason to come is just as good lol
the introduction of eusocial honeybees to the Americas is actually more of a downside than people realize. the native bee species are specifically designed to pollinate many species of plants and are much more effective at their specific plant than honeybees. there's a good video on youtube about how we are saving the wrong bees that explains this well.
@@V77710 Leaf litter, downed wood you just let rot, and actively trying to inhibit honeybees. The leaves and rotting wood gives the bumbles and so on places to make their nests.
In NA dandelions are technically invasive but are beneficial to the ecosystem as they provided a new food source to animals without competing with or pushing out native species as they filled a previously unfilled niche.
Dandelion is pest but same time you can use it like herb you can use the flowers and leaves and root of the plant and bees and benefit insects like them like hover fly's and ladybirds they eat pest
@@ahpchagi1 dandelions historically are a core food source for people everywhere it grows. Ancient Greek warriors ate dandelion salads before battle. They only became a pest when Victorian lawn culture took hold and people became so obsessed with perfectly structured yards
@@randomasgray yeah there a lot of plants we call pest or weeds like string nettel has lot of benefits as it high in iron and natural high nitrogen fertilizer for plants and if you drink it as tea it a detox
TLDR: there’s an aquatic plant called hydrillas that choked the waters around Washington DC. It soaked up runoff (ie lawn fertilizer) and provided as fish/insect nurseries. As it improved the water quality, it caused its own decline. There’s a non-native aquatic plant in the waterways around Washington DC called hydrillas. They completely clogged the shorelines of rivers and made boating and sportfishing challenging to say the least. They had to be mowed like grass to maintain infrastructure to porting and discharging areas. However, they filled a niche in the ecosystem that has been vacated for… probably a century? If not more. See, cities discharge a lot of waste. Modern cities dump fertilizers and effluents (certain hormones excreted from urine is an example of this. It’s generally too expensive to treat such a large quantity of water from these rather difficult to metabolize compounds). As a result, the water surrounding the urban and especially suburban areas have become loaded with free floating algae. Native aquatic plants choked out due to poor water visibility or outright died from chemical burns. Dead zones started to appear in which there was so much nutrients, that decomposition would deprive certain areas of water. Absolutely nothing could live there save for some bacteria mats. So, there is now an almost complete extinction of any aquatic plants. Fish that relied on them as nursery and food source have demised to token numbers. The soil is basically too anaerobic for the benthic community. In comes those hydrillas. They could grow in extremely low light conditions and consume suburban runoff. At first, there was a general panic upon the plant’s arrival. It literally covered the rivers at first. There was a fear that the plant would be the death blow to the remaining ecosystem (as we knew it). And it certainly did cause ecological damage. However, over time the plant transported the excessive nutrients out of the water systems and provided as nurseries to small species of fish. Ironically as the water quality improved, the invasive plant declined. It’s still around, but has become naturalized.
While honey bee populations in the us are declining, there’s more “specialized” bees in the us that we really need to worry about, as their numbers are declining much faster, and there’s some plants that can’t get pollenated without these “specialized” bees, as these bees are really good at pollenating more specific plant species.
FYI honey bee populations in the US have never been in decline for as long as we’ve been tracking it. It’s more or less stable. The occasional downward trends in honeybee populations are almost certainly stochastic. www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Highlights/2019/2019_Honey_Bees_StatisticalSummary.pdf
Since the herons are now efficiently hunting crabs and lowering their numbers, they're both in the process of balancing their populations. As the population of crabs grew extremely high, the introduced heron's had many to eat and bred successfully. As their population grew, crabs were gradually lowered. Soon, the herons will be too numerous and crabs too few. Starvation and competition will even the birds out, and as they lower, crabs will have a chance to bounce back. The predator/prey population influx is most likely starting to take place.
That is a good observation, but alas I fear it may be too optimistic. The Herons will likely just switch to another species of prey after the Land Crab population decreases enough. Most predators have a preferred prey species, but it is very rare for a predator to be exclusive to one alone. The original Heron's population may have been balanced by lower brood numbers, a slower rate of reproduction, or perhaps very specific requirements for nesting sites. The New Heron is not likely to have the same limitations. . . My next question would then be, what effect would a decline in the Land Crab population have on the ecosystem ?
Not technically beneficial, more neutral, but the lovebird parrot population in Phoenix, Arizona could be a contender. It started off as an exotic pet, but then a pair escaped into the wild and have been populating ever since. They make their homes in abandoned nest holes in saguaro cactus from another bird species (They dig a new nest each year so there is a lost of unused real estate). And the parrots do not compete for resources because the local Phoenix human population is happy to leave out feed them and the birds make use of all the lawn sprinklers for a free drink/bath.
In Australia there is huge debate and division around cats with anti cat voices beginning to win out. Outdoor cats are becoming banned in more and more areas with people opting for indoor only and cat runs. Culling is becoming less controversial too as the damage they cause is clear.
@rikilamaru whilst our overall environmental management has been pretty shit we have gotten better at killing populations of animals.... Australia created and released 2 extremely effective bio weapons against invasive rabbits which brought their population down to almost zero for decades each time even though it was very sketchy with the virus escaping the lab and decimating the population before testing was complete. It really passed off Europe too because they didn't want the virus to wipe out their native rabbit populations.
yeah, i mean with the example of the invasive cord reeds, they aren't particularly useful to the birds, they just use it for nesting, but they'd use the native cord reed instead had humans not messed up the environment. the invasive reed still has a net negative impact on the environment
Really enjoyed the coverage of invasive plants. It's an under explored topic when you consider they can have just as much if not more of an impact on there environments as animals do.
I was born and raised in Michigan. I grew up in the 60s and 70s. We had cattails everywhere that there was standing water, ditches, or swamps. As a kid, I thoroughly explored those swamps. The Redwing Blackbirds' nests were my favorite. Now living in LA Ca, I go home and all I see is tall grass that has pushed out all the cattails. Just look at the drive to DFW. All the ditches alongside the road were once full of fuzzy brown cattails. Now it's all this tall grass. That must have some impact on the ecosystems.
On your next video about introduced species, you should definitely talk about the animals introduced to Pleistocene Park! In an effort to recreate/imitate the mammoth steppe biome, a wildlife preserve in Russia has introduced yaks, musk oxen, horses, camels, and other megafauna to gauge it's impact on climate change.
It's been a very interesting experiment to be sure. When it comes to introduced species, I'm in favor of most of them, but I do think they should avoid importing ones from other hemispheres like American bison. In terms of invasiveness, the risk is relatively low since megafauna tend to have low birth rates, but pathogens could be a big issue, especially with closely related ungulates. That said, nothing stopping us from trying the same thing in Canada or Alaska with local megafauna
Also bee-related: the Robinia plant is technically invasive in Hungary, but it's an excellent bee plant and produces one of the best quality honey, which is highly valued here.
Robinia pseudo-accacia is an invasive exotic specie in a lot of Europe, but as you said produce a very high quality honey. In France, we have them on a lot of habitats, especially in urban areas like abandonned sites or along the highways. It's a really big issues, like many invasive species introduces for ornemental purposes, as Ailanthus altissima or Buddleia Davidii. People do not realise the gravity of the threat that invasive species represent... Such a shame man.
Very informative and I'm glad to see a video that goes into detail on the good side of introduced species. I have a video idea if you're interested It's basically suggesting which animals and plants should carefully introduce into a specific ecosystem, to help increase the region's biodiversity and possible fill in a niche that's was either long gone or a new one that was needed. Places like Hawaii, South Africa, Rwanda, USA, Canada, India, Mexico, Cuba, Iceland, The UK, France, Russia, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan, etc. Could be examples of nations to include.
That does sound like a very interesting idea but it also sounds like a minefield. I think most introductions from the government have had good intentions but have ended up very badly like cane toads. I still might give it a go when i have a bit more time though, thanks for the suggestion :)
@@TsukiCove is worth noting that the cane toad introduction into Australian cane fields failed spectacularly because there was no research done beforehand. Farmers were free to import them directly from South America. This was in the 1930s many decades before Australia implemented very strict controls on the flow of organisms going in and out of the country. The people that imported the toads did so based on assumptions that they’d be the solution to the cane beetle problem. What was learned the hard way is that the toads can’t climb up sugar cane stalks so the beetles had an easy escape. The imported toads had just one job and they were bad at it meaning there was no upside to their introduction. If the farmers had bothered to do some research before introduction they might have realized that the native tree frogs could be harvested from the wild as tadpoles raised in captivity and then released en masse into cane fields infested with cane beetles. Even if such a strategy resulted in a surge in the numbers of native tree frogs in the wild their numbers would be brought back into equilibrium by the predators that would be able to hunt them without being poisoned.
In my area honeybees have a hard time with the climate, its extremely wet with mild weather here which can cause condensation to build up inside the nest. Also the common plant life is often not suitable for them due to the large amounts of forest cover with few flowering plants. For this reason they are hard to maintain and have little wild presence when compared to other areas. The dominant bee species are the several species of bumble bees, leaf cutter bees and sweat bees which due to being native are well adapted for the climate. Though this is in stark contrast to further inland where the summers are warmer and the environment more modified with far less tree cover, my state has a lot of climate variation over a very small area which makes it fascinating and frustrating to grow a garden.
That’s because the honey bee isn’t as suited for our environment as we think. Some studies say that honey bees are actually bad for native bee species by spreading disease.
I hate to say it but there are places where unfixed cats should absolutely be illegal and outdoor cats should be completely illegal. Honestly should just be outright banned in some places. Cat owners are largely not responsible.
Yes large actions should be taken ASAP to preserve native species. All feral cats and outdoor cats do is torture and skill native species for fun. Ecosystems require diversity to exist and cats are destroying it. Only reason cats have been able to exist as they have is because people find them cute.
Zebra mussels have some benefits from what I understand in clearing up water and helping fish that benefit from that. I used to do biological surveys on the Illinois River and I remember hearing the biologist that supervised me talking about how it would be bad but it would also have some good effects.
Cool video! I saw several new video suggestions in the comments so I'm throwing one out there too! I think a countdown of the most successful reintroductions would be interesting, or maybe a countdown of the greatest species comeback from the brink of extinction.
Our native bees like the mason bees are way better at pollinating than the honey bees. One mason will pollinate as many flowers as dozens of honey bees.
Yeah introduced would be the more appropriate term as it’s more neutral and refers only to how a species got there (through human activity whether deliberate or not) while invasive means that the introduced organism is causing harm
Animals getting outcompeted by others better at filling their niche or beating their survival mechanisms is the history of evolution and natural selection. I find it hard to get upset at invasive species for this reason. They are just more successful creatures.
the feral donkeys/burros of the Southwestern US are a notable example of a technically invasive species helping the ecosystem. The donkeys control brush, reduce wildfire risk, and bring the water table to the surface through the digging of “burro wells”.
Ive read that honey bees compet with native bees by of course competing but ALSO pollenating non native plants. Honey bees are one of the few inasive creatures i dont abduct from the wild as pets or put down becouse i know it might belong ti a farmers hive.
The evening-primrose _(Oenothera biennis)_ was introduced as a vegetable - the roots are really tasty! - from North America into Europe at ca 1620. It naturalized and has become common on ruderal sites where it forms absolutely no threat for the native flora and fauna!
Another invasive weed which was introduced from South America in many parts of the world (North America, Australia, Europe...) is the quickweed _(Galinsoga parviflora)_ . In Germany we call it the _Franzosenkraut_ ("Weed of the French") because the people assumed it was introduced by Napoleon's soldiers. It seems not to harm the native flora at least in Europe.
Invasive and introduced species are a completed issue. There are many species that have very negative impacts on the ecosystems they're introduced, but many species, including some of the same species that are highly negative on the environment, have beneficial aspects. I am on the side of the fence of managing, controlling, and if possible, removing non-native species from a novel environment. But I will recognize whatever beneficial aspects these species will have. In a perfect world, species would only go extinct through processes unrelated to current/historic (primarily post-agricultural societies) human factors, and species would be introduced to environments under similar circumstances. But we do not live in such a world. And we have make sound decisions and policies regarding such species that are the best for society and the environment.
if i recall the Horse is technically an invasive species to most of the world but really havent done any major damage to ecosystems and even actually helped them instead
Technically, horses are actually native to North America. The native horses originally went extinct ~10,000 years ago when early Native Americans ate them all, and now the introduced horses are filling the old niche.
@@princevermilion8799 exactly. Australia is a place that has not had any native ungulates which means that all introduced ungulates are damaging to the various ecosystems, even camels in the desert.
@@thegreatbutterfly The American horse went extinct 15 000 years ago before native americans arrived in the continent. The ecosystem back then was not the same as it is now, so NO they are not filling an old niche, because the Horse went extinct precisely because its ecosystem changed (end of the Glacial Age Period) and they had no place in their "niche" anymore. So modern horse had a damaging impact on American ecosystem of today cause it wasnt planned on the natural evolution of the fauna and flora of the americas after the end of the Ice Age. Also American extinct Horse and Eurasian horse are vastly different.
Sable Island off Nova Scotia has wild horses, they were dumped there, they are in bad shape, they can't chew grass without a bunch of sand which grinds down their teeth!
In the UK there are several phasmid species that have made a home. They seem to have no negative impact as they simply nibble on very common plant species but are a food source for birds.
Hello Tsuki!! Can you made a series on the harm of seashell trade to environment?!? I know you started your channel on aquarium trade and I would to hear your thoughts on it
about the bees stuff: no, honeybees are not good in places they arent native to, yes sure they polinise quite a lot due to having the biggest colonies betwen all bee species, but they are horrible polinators, they dont know how to properly polinate various plants and even actively compete and kill the native polinator species, which actually know how to polinate native species properly. here in brazil for exemple, we have an species of tree that needs an bit of an elaborate procedure to be polinisated, honeybees actively kill the species that know about this procedure, and when it comes to taking the place of the native bee the honeybee skips it all and simply depleted the plant from nectar and fecundation doesnt happen at all.
Woah! I saw the yellow-crowned night heron on Saturday two days ago at the LA zoo! Also I bet you the cordgrass was introduced to be a substitute for roofing for sheds and barns, and to be used for weaving.
Hello, I am a biologist working with Invasive species. This video is an offense for me and my collegues. Literally misinformation. The last segment is just a pain to hear. And I challenge you all to hear it for a second time and tell me how an invasive specie with all of its downsides is better because is home to an endangered bird while the native one does exactly that without, well, being invasive. If you really want good ecology videos I can remember right now of Atlas Pro. This video is horrible and brings me a tear to my eye.
Another I'll add is from where I live, for once a rare instance of endangered animals being a benefit; the "island apple snail" is an invasive snail to south Florida, we have our own apple snail species (Florida apple snail) but it's numbers have been in decline, the "Snail Kite" is a bird native to the area and has also seen it's population decrease, however, in regions in which the island apple snail is found the recorded numbers of snail kites has risen, both combatting the spread of the invasive snail, and assisting the snail kites numbers.
The first time I ever saw a Yellow-crowned Night-Heron was in Bermuda over 20 years ago. I had no idea they were introduced and had assumed they had arrived there on their own, much like Cattle Egrets.
An interesting one is Rosy Face Lovebirds in Arizona. Since they are completely dependent on human infrastructure, they remain confined only to the city. They use the abandoned homes of wood peckers and Hawaiian trees (which are also dependent on human infrastructure) so they have very little effect on the actual wild here.
Invasive cordgrass was a curse on Willapa Bay, Washington. It is being eradicated. It was covering the tidal flats used by shorebirds and many other groups of species.
As an Australian, I was raised on a steady diet of environmental awareness stuff like this, and I do think I have a good contender: Dungbeetles in Australia. Humans brought agriculture with them, and the large-scale agriculture of European settlers brought with them agricultural animals, cheif among them sheep and cows. now, Australia's ecology was basically 100% unprepared to deal with cowshit and it was becoming a problem, so some enterprising souls introduced dungbeetles to Australia to help clean up all the shit, and an impending ecological crisis was actually intentionally and successfully averted. I haven't ever heard of invasive Dungbeetles wiping anything out either, so I think it's one of the rare few successful introductions.
Just vacationed in Peru and lake Titicaca is full of cord grass, with whole floating towns living on the lake on 6:22 huge mats made of the grass. Also you can eat the root part, not much taste to it but you can eat it.
I Thought i remembered seeing a thing about how our support of honey bees caused a decline in other pollinators and now that the honey bee is struggling we are trying to keep it alive so we dont screw ourselves over worse
@@TsukiCove in the UK there are many examples of animals that people consider native but were introduced. Ring neck pheasant, rabbit, hare, many deer species, grey squirrel, vole, some game birds, Canada geese, house mice, black and brown rats, etc.
@@turtleman190 hmmm yeah that was the first species that sprang to mind but given that the dingo has been in Australia long enough to be considered naturalized calling it invasive would justifiably be contentious. We know it drove native predators like the thylacine and Tasmanian devil extinct on the mainland but the ecosystem adapted and they became distinct enough as a species to be considered native. Wild dogs, hybridized domestic dogs that interbred with nearby dingo populations are a different story.
The biggest problem with invasive species is that, regardless of whether it's an mammal, bird, fish, insect or plant, they don't stay in the areas where they should naturally be, but instead spread to areas where they don't belong at all, and this poses a threat to the old species and sensitive ecosystem that were in the area before their invasion. For this reason, the species should stay in the areas where they should naturally be and not spread to new areas because it is harmful and unnatural and the earth cannot withstand even a small change. For example, the black rat is an invasive species that arrived in Europe from Asia during the Iron Age and has caused great destruction ever since, because no rat would naturally belong in Europe. And the balance of nature that was lost with the invasion could be regained and efforts to repair the its damage could only be made if invasive species were removed from areas where they don't belong and limited to areas where they should stay. Therefore, states and nation unions need effective programs to solve invasive species.
One that I can't figure out are the Chinese and European mantises in North America. I first read an article saying they were indisputably bad, but it was from a Nature Conservatory, Brandywine, and not a scientific publication. One of the claims it made was that they were a threat to native hummingbird population, which was disputed by the National Audubon Society (they have caught hummingbirds, but it's incredably rare and they post no real threat to their populations) the other claim is they have displaces native species, which seems plausible, but there has never been any research into this, despite it being stated as fact (without citing sources) And the majority of the other articles make these points and cite the Brandywine article. On the flip side there are just as many sources claiming they're "Naturalized" (without citing sources for that claim either), but both species have been here for over 100 years, and native species are doing fine . The only concrete claim I was able to confirm is that the USDA APHIS, the agencies trying to control indisputably bad species like BMSB and Spotted Lanternfly, allow Chinese and Euro mantis egg masses to be sold and transported through the mail for intentional release as a form of pest control. There are no eradication efforts against them as they are beneficial as generalist predators rather than being an ecological stressor like an invasive pest, and there are a lot of other invasive predators that we consider indisputably "good" like the House Centipede and the Masked Hunter Assassin Bug. I've gone as far as to email people in the USDA and Entomology professors, and they won't say "good or bad" one way or the other, which is satisfying I guess. Things in nature rarely have "good" and "Bad" absolutes, perhaps they inhabit some grey area, do a little good, do a little bad. But the common belief held by most people is that they're this huge problem, in no small part to these informal nature blogs repeating this unfounded Brandywine article.
I read that although honey bees are great pollinators there are so many different species of insects that also spread pollen including bunches of species of wasp that are native to North America. I don’t think honey bees are necessary or bring as many benefits as they may seem especially because they dominate other species and drive down their numbers substantially
I completely agree with honeybees. Yes, they're pollinators, but people are actively allowing native pollinators to die out and actively not protecting them in favour of honeybees simply because of the ascribed economic value of honey and farming. Yes, superficially beneficial, but at the cost of native species. You can simply switch them out.
Wow! At 2:54 into the video I saw where you captured a Turkey Vulture on film. I'd known that featherless head anywhere. Didn't know that they flew to Bermuda though.
I was a little confused with the title of the video, since the term invasive species is more often used for a species that has a negative effect on the ecosystem. These species are not always non-native.
I'm a chick forest technician from Montreal, I majored in Sylviculture, my daughter's a biologist and more on board with live and let live but cats are pets thrown out by humans!
Sorry to burst your bubble there, but the Western Honeybee (Apis Mellifera) does not pollinate tomatoes. The native Bumblebees will when nothing else is available, as in a greenhouse operation. Native to central America, Melipona spp., are the bees that the tomatoes get pollinated by. Being tropical, they're not found in colder areas of the continents. Tomatoes have tube structures that the pollen sits inside. These bees have evolved to shake that pollen loose by a process called "Sonification." A buzzing that stimulates the pollen to drop.
Gardeners in N. America brought over "Meadow Rue" a lovely flower that grows in England in damp places. As is typical with invasive species, they escaped and started pushing out native plants. Worse, they were not a food source for native animals.. But somebody got smart and searched for a reason why Meadow Rue hasn't taken over the English countryside. Found an insect that eats its leaves. The national ag officials here kept them in an enclosure for 5 decades to make sure they weren't bringing over any hitchhikers diseases or other pests. Nah. They were good. Released about 20 years ago, they've done a wonderful job controlling the Meadow Rue, which is now just another lovely flower in our damp areas. Although, still [sigh] they don't feed anything here.
The question is dangerous under what circumstances? Think of Mosquito vs Tiger in Asia... I'd say one of the biggest threats to humans is the wild boar. It goes into cities, can be very aggressive, and has the means to outrun and maul humans... Plus, we aren't allowed to hunt it in cities, let alone shoot them... In the case of domesticated animals dogs, horses, and cows would probably rank high. They easily outcompete bears who are next to extinct... Some birds can pause a serious threat to climbers and mountainbikers. Otherwise, they would be incapable of doing sufficient damage. Then there are animals that kill indirectly by causing drivers to hit obstacles...
@@edi9892 Dangerous in terms of causing serious harm or even death in both provoked and unprovoked attacks. If i had to make my own list this will be it 1. Portuguese Man O War Its a siphonophore that has venom so strong it can cause an allergic reaction that blocks your airway and stops your heart. 2. European adder Its a snake that only bites when provoked but has venom which can cause blood blisters and extreme allergic reaction which will take you a year to recover from, if you recover at all. In sweden there's about 1300 recorded bites a year. 3. European brown bear Pretty self explanatory, there are around 37 brown bear attacks in europe per year with most of them occuring in eastern europe. 4. Wild boar Everything that you said. 5. Moose Extremely dangerous in both provoked and unprovoked situations, but its worse when its provoked. Also moose cause some really fatal car accidents because when you hit a moose with a car the moose has a very high chance of falling on top of your car, crushing both you and your car.
@@danielbogdanoski4412 I'd put cows a lot higher on my personal list. To me, they are the most hostile creatures I've met. I had it twice that they charged at me and crashed through their fence without me doing anything to provoke them. Technically, I've had more dogs trying to take a bite out of me, but unless they're big, I have little to worry about...
Speaking of humboldt bay California. I live two blocks away. We also have quite a few egrets in the area that aren't native. Idk if they're beneficial but they are beautiful.
Honey bees have been extremely harmful to native ecosystem in NA, it’s not just to the native bees. While they are generalist pollinators, they are still a bit selective and often will favor non-native plants. This can cause cascading effects on an ecosystem.
Maybe this is a Jen gripe moment, but I remember there being three classifications of life, that being native, naturalized and invasive. Native life was organisms that were native to the area, naturalized were organisms that were not native but not harmful, and invasive being organisms that were not native and harmful to the ecosystem they are in. What happened to the term “naturalized”? Did everyone just become too polarized and drop it altogether? As for species that are beneficial, I know of one that falls into a gray area for me. This is (Elaeagnus umbellata) the autumn olive. It was brought over to America to aid in soil retention and farmers quickly got into the habit of growing by fruit trees because they fix nitrogen to the soil, causing the trees to produce more fruit. The fruit of the autumn olive has more lycopene than a tomato and can be made into a jelly that is similar to cranberry jelly. All manner of native wildlife love it’s berries, birds happily nest in it’s branches and barren ground is made fertile for native plants by it’s nitrogen fixing properties. The reason it is considered an invasive species is because it makes the soil too fertile for poor soil loving native plants and because the seeds spread so much due to it’s massive berry production.
Yes, but it crowds out native shrubs that are much better (more nutritious) for birds. It can also completely shade out desirable herbaceous cover, and prevent tree re-generation. I spend a lot of time killing autumn olives!
The honey bees sounded like a stretch, considering they don't seem to have much of a benefit on the ecosystem, only on human businesses, which aren't really the same thing.
How about gobies in Lake Erie and Huron? They are providing for countless smallmouth bass and walleyes. Salmon as well in the Great Lakes are also introduced species to feed on alewives (also an introduced species). Plenty of examples in North America
One miss here... the introduction of freshwater trout and salmonids to the southern hemisphere has been a huge benefit to places like Argentina, Chile and New Zealand. Not only from an environmental perspective but also economically. The rivers and lakes these fish now inhabit were once void of any game fish entirely. All of those countries have done extensive impact studies on their introductions and every one agrees that these introductions were overwhelmingly beneficial
it's just because it's so obvious, most of the invasive species in the world are invasive because of humans and humans are destroying the world everybody knows that
The way I see it, these species are bound to find each other at some point in the future. It sucks for those that are out-classes by the non-native species, but in the end that's what natural selection decides. Although many would disagree, even humans are part of that same nature. The chaos that follows after humans is profound, but ultimately another natural feature at work. If species can't find a niche amongst it, well, that's just it. Eventually the sea turtles that can distinguish between jellyfish and garbage will survive. We can try to reduce garbage all we want, but we are only delaying and, honestly, disrupting natural selection by doing so. It's like medication. We can delay our death and extend our lives by carefully drugging ourselves, but when that one disaster happens that medicines are not available the humans who relied on them will perish. Of course we could never know exactly what traits are necessary for the longest survival of a species because the great filters are unknown, but at this point it's just reverse evolution.
It’s pretty clear that honeybees aren’t benefiting the native ecosystem of North America but the introduced Eurasian crops. The native bees pollinate the native crops you listed. The possibility for the herons to endanger the crabs on Bermuda is genuine, and the golf course is not an ecosystem either. It’s a built environment just like a parking lot or farm field. The Spartina is interesting, but the issue there is that the native spartina also provides habitat. If the native cordgrass can be maintain and expanded then the rail will readily near there. Besides, one rail benefiting from the invasive while more species suffer is not “benefiting the ecosystem”. This video, while pointing out interesting introduction cases, ultimately incorrectly equates humans’ built environment and objectives with ecosystem health, though they are typically not aligned.
Asian green muscle. Out competing with native Florida muscles and barnacles, they clog power plants water in take pipes. But the sheepshead(native fish of North America) love them
Have any studies been done on the ecological impact red foxes have had on the Falklands? Seeing as the local seabird population there was already used to predation by the now extinct Falklands Island wolf, I imagine the fox filled that necessary niche quite comfortably.
You're just playing around with semantics in this video. Do not downplay the affects of invasive species by providing examples that are not considered invasive species. Invasive species are organisms that are specifically non-native AND cause economic and/or ecological and/or human health problems. All Invasive species are introduced but not all introduced species are Invasive. For example, the bird you mention was introduced by scientists as a bio-control to replace an extinct relative. Do not conflate this purposeful scientific introduction with invasive species. That is the same sentiment held in the past that led to the introduction of invasive species across the world by people who do not understand. The grass you mention is invasive. Don't try to twist it around. It nearly destroyed SF Bay by choking it out. Hybridization 99% of the time is BAD. It's hybridized form changed native marsh into meadow. When you completely change the ecosystem you always cause more negative that positive. This kind of rhetoric is why conservationists are having problems with the public.
The truth is that not all invasive species are harmful, but if we didn't f with the ecosystem in the first place we wouldn't need to f with it any more, so please keep things as native as possible.
The case of cats as an invasive species is especially interesting to me. Apart from being invasive, they have another unfair advantage: being pets. Even if the ecosystem could not support a permanent population of cats, heathcare and feeding through humans makes sure they cannot go extinct in any ecosystem, no matter how inhospitable it is to cats (exept underwater I guess)
As a Bermudian, it's always a treat to randomly see something about Bermuda on UA-cam. As a birder, its even more awesome to see a piece about birds in Bermuda. I remember when i was younger, there would always be land crabs pancaked on the south shore road by passing cars, but ever since the mid 2000s, I couldn't tell you the last time I saw crabs anywhere near the numbers they used to be in, and almost exclusively in dunes near the beaches. Both the introduction of the herons as well as the conservation efforts of the Bermuda petrel (cahow) were headed by Dr. David Wingate who i've had the pleasure of meeting several times. Cahow chicks are some of the cutest little fluff balls of down I've ever had the joy of interacting with lol.
Awesome work as always, Tsuki!
That's awesome I've always wanted to go to Bermuda it looks beautiful. I did talk very breifly about Dr. David Wingate in my last video on the Cahow, he really has done some amazing work.
@@TsukiCove Would be awesome if you could pop over at any time! They do tours of Nonsuch Island where the cahow nests are, in the spring, if that's something you'd be interested in. But any other reason to come is just as good lol
That sounds amazing, it's now on list of places to visit after New Zealand :)
Great to know the conservation efforts carried out. Thank you.
As a georgian, i feel the same way.
the introduction of eusocial honeybees to the Americas is actually more of a downside than people realize. the native bee species are specifically designed to pollinate many species of plants and are much more effective at their specific plant than honeybees. there's a good video on youtube about how we are saving the wrong bees that explains this well.
Can you drop the link
@@jasonedenburg9427 ua-cam.com/video/VSYgDssQUtA/v-deo.html
Everyone keeps saying we are saving the wrong bees but no one ever bothers telling us how to to save the right ones
@@jasonedenburg9427 ua-cam.com/video/VSYgDssQUtA/v-deo.html&ab_channel=DWPlanetA
@@V77710 Leaf litter, downed wood you just let rot, and actively trying to inhibit honeybees. The leaves and rotting wood gives the bumbles and so on places to make their nests.
In NA dandelions are technically invasive but are beneficial to the ecosystem as they provided a new food source to animals without competing with or pushing out native species as they filled a previously unfilled niche.
North America?
@@lemur88 yeah. NA= North America
Dandelion is pest but same time you can use it like herb you can use the flowers and leaves and root of the plant and bees and benefit insects like them like hover fly's and ladybirds they eat pest
@@ahpchagi1 dandelions historically are a core food source for people everywhere it grows. Ancient Greek warriors ate dandelion salads before battle. They only became a pest when Victorian lawn culture took hold and people became so obsessed with perfectly structured yards
@@randomasgray yeah there a lot of plants we call pest or weeds like string nettel has lot of benefits as it high in iron and natural high nitrogen fertilizer for plants and if you drink it as tea it a detox
TLDR: there’s an aquatic plant called hydrillas that choked the waters around Washington DC. It soaked up runoff (ie lawn fertilizer) and provided as fish/insect nurseries. As it improved the water quality, it caused its own decline.
There’s a non-native aquatic plant in the waterways around Washington DC called hydrillas. They completely clogged the shorelines of rivers and made boating and sportfishing challenging to say the least. They had to be mowed like grass to maintain infrastructure to porting and discharging areas. However, they filled a niche in the ecosystem that has been vacated for… probably a century? If not more. See, cities discharge a lot of waste. Modern cities dump fertilizers and effluents (certain hormones excreted from urine is an example of this. It’s generally too expensive to treat such a large quantity of water from these rather difficult to metabolize compounds). As a result, the water surrounding the urban and especially suburban areas have become loaded with free floating algae. Native aquatic plants choked out due to poor water visibility or outright died from chemical burns. Dead zones started to appear in which there was so much nutrients, that decomposition would deprive certain areas of water. Absolutely nothing could live there save for some bacteria mats. So, there is now an almost complete extinction of any aquatic plants. Fish that relied on them as nursery and food source have demised to token numbers. The soil is basically too anaerobic for the benthic community.
In comes those hydrillas. They could grow in extremely low light conditions and consume suburban runoff. At first, there was a general panic upon the plant’s arrival. It literally covered the rivers at first. There was a fear that the plant would be the death blow to the remaining ecosystem (as we knew it). And it certainly did cause ecological damage. However, over time the plant transported the excessive nutrients out of the water systems and provided as nurseries to small species of fish. Ironically as the water quality improved, the invasive plant declined. It’s still around, but has become naturalized.
A soul for a soul
While honey bee populations in the us are declining, there’s more “specialized” bees in the us that we really need to worry about, as their numbers are declining much faster, and there’s some plants that can’t get pollenated without these “specialized” bees, as these bees are really good at pollenating more specific plant species.
FYI honey bee populations in the US have never been in decline for as long as we’ve been tracking it. It’s more or less stable. The occasional downward trends in honeybee populations are almost certainly stochastic. www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Highlights/2019/2019_Honey_Bees_StatisticalSummary.pdf
@@natevenarske part of the reason we should be caring about the bees in the us that aren't honey bees
Since the herons are now efficiently hunting crabs and lowering their numbers, they're both in the process of balancing their populations. As the population of crabs grew extremely high, the introduced heron's had many to eat and bred successfully. As their population grew, crabs were gradually lowered. Soon, the herons will be too numerous and crabs too few. Starvation and competition will even the birds out, and as they lower, crabs will have a chance to bounce back. The predator/prey population influx is most likely starting to take place.
That is a good observation, but alas I fear it may be too optimistic.
The Herons will likely just switch to another species of prey after the Land Crab population decreases enough. Most predators have a preferred prey species, but it is very rare for a predator to be exclusive to one alone. The original Heron's population may have been balanced by lower brood numbers, a slower rate of reproduction, or perhaps very specific requirements for nesting sites. The New Heron is not likely to have the same limitations. . .
My next question would then be, what effect would a decline in the Land Crab population have on the ecosystem ?
Not technically beneficial, more neutral, but the lovebird parrot population in Phoenix, Arizona could be a contender. It started off as an exotic pet, but then a pair escaped into the wild and have been populating ever since. They make their homes in abandoned nest holes in saguaro cactus from another bird species (They dig a new nest each year so there is a lost of unused real estate). And the parrots do not compete for resources because the local Phoenix human population is happy to leave out feed them and the birds make use of all the lawn sprinklers for a free drink/bath.
Definitely introduced but not necessarily beneficial or invasive...I like it!
In Australia there is huge debate and division around cats with anti cat voices beginning to win out. Outdoor cats are becoming banned in more and more areas with people opting for indoor only and cat runs. Culling is becoming less controversial too as the damage they cause is clear.
Which is good since all feral cats do is kill things for fun. Nice to see people supporting native species rather than invasive ones.
so will australlia also loose that cat war to like during the emu war
@rikilamaru whilst our overall environmental management has been pretty shit we have gotten better at killing populations of animals....
Australia created and released 2 extremely effective bio weapons against invasive rabbits which brought their population down to almost zero for decades each time even though it was very sketchy with the virus escaping the lab and decimating the population before testing was complete. It really passed off Europe too because they didn't want the virus to wipe out their native rabbit populations.
This just feels like 3 nonnative species that have been beneficial to humans, the golfing industry and, cleaning up our messes lol
Yeah pretty much
yeah, i mean with the example of the invasive cord reeds, they aren't particularly useful to the birds, they just use it for nesting, but they'd use the native cord reed instead had humans not messed up the environment. the invasive reed still has a net negative impact on the environment
the title says non native ecosystems
Really enjoyed the coverage of invasive plants. It's an under explored topic when you consider they can have just as much if not more of an impact on there environments as animals do.
And invasive plants can often create habitats that invasive animals benefit from
You've dramatically understated the amount of damage cats cause our worlds ecosystems.
Dogs require leashes,why not cats?They are far more destructive than dogs.They kill for kicks.
I was born and raised in Michigan. I grew up in the 60s and 70s. We had cattails everywhere that there was standing water, ditches, or swamps. As a kid, I thoroughly explored those swamps.
The Redwing Blackbirds' nests were my favorite.
Now living in LA Ca, I go home and all I see is tall grass that has pushed out all the cattails. Just look at the drive to DFW. All the ditches alongside the road were once full of fuzzy brown cattails. Now it's all this tall grass. That must have some impact on the ecosystems.
That sounds like Phragmites australis
Non-native grasses are probably the most destructive plants.
On your next video about introduced species, you should definitely talk about the animals introduced to Pleistocene Park! In an effort to recreate/imitate the mammoth steppe biome, a wildlife preserve in Russia has introduced yaks, musk oxen, horses, camels, and other megafauna to gauge it's impact on climate change.
It's been a very interesting experiment to be sure. When it comes to introduced species, I'm in favor of most of them, but I do think they should avoid importing ones from other hemispheres like American bison. In terms of invasiveness, the risk is relatively low since megafauna tend to have low birth rates, but pathogens could be a big issue, especially with closely related ungulates. That said, nothing stopping us from trying the same thing in Canada or Alaska with local megafauna
@@CrownofMischief there are no living European bison to worry about.
@@probablynotdad6553 you sure💀
@@probablynotdad6553 look up wisent
@@CrownofMischief They import what they can get a hold of.
Also bee-related: the Robinia plant is technically invasive in Hungary, but it's an excellent bee plant and produces one of the best quality honey, which is highly valued here.
Oh I bet. Even here in their native range, they crowd out a lot of other natives when they colonise an area
Robinia pseudo-accacia is an invasive exotic specie in a lot of Europe, but as you said produce a very high quality honey. In France, we have them on a lot of habitats, especially in urban areas like abandonned sites or along the highways. It's a really big issues, like many invasive species introduces for ornemental purposes, as Ailanthus altissima or Buddleia Davidii. People do not realise the gravity of the threat that invasive species represent... Such a shame man.
There's lupine in Iceland, it has helped fight desertification and helped native forest to expand.
Honey bees have almost entirely wiped the native Australian bees which are much smaller and have no sting.
Very informative and I'm glad to see a video that goes into detail on the good side of introduced species.
I have a video idea if you're interested
It's basically suggesting which animals and plants should carefully introduce into a specific ecosystem, to help increase the region's biodiversity and possible fill in a niche that's was either long gone or a new one that was needed.
Places like Hawaii, South Africa, Rwanda, USA, Canada, India, Mexico, Cuba, Iceland, The UK, France, Russia, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan, etc. Could be examples of nations to include.
That does sound like a very interesting idea but it also sounds like a minefield. I think most introductions from the government have had good intentions but have ended up very badly like cane toads. I still might give it a go when i have a bit more time though, thanks for the suggestion :)
@@TsukiCove you're very welcome, and I understand completely.
@@TsukiCove is worth noting that the cane toad introduction into Australian cane fields failed spectacularly because there was no research done beforehand. Farmers were free to import them directly from South America. This was in the 1930s many decades before Australia implemented very strict controls on the flow of organisms going in and out of the country. The people that imported the toads did so based on assumptions that they’d be the solution to the cane beetle problem. What was learned the hard way is that the toads can’t climb up sugar cane stalks so the beetles had an easy escape. The imported toads had just one job and they were bad at it meaning there was no upside to their introduction. If the farmers had bothered to do some research before introduction they might have realized that the native tree frogs could be harvested from the wild as tadpoles raised in captivity and then released en masse into cane fields infested with cane beetles. Even if such a strategy resulted in a surge in the numbers of native tree frogs in the wild their numbers would be brought back into equilibrium by the predators that would be able to hunt them without being poisoned.
Wow,you really did the video that I requested you to make.I really loved this video and keep up the work
In my area honeybees have a hard time with the climate, its extremely wet with mild weather here which can cause condensation to build up inside the nest. Also the common plant life is often not suitable for them due to the large amounts of forest cover with few flowering plants. For this reason they are hard to maintain and have little wild presence when compared to other areas. The dominant bee species are the several species of bumble bees, leaf cutter bees and sweat bees which due to being native are well adapted for the climate.
Though this is in stark contrast to further inland where the summers are warmer and the environment more modified with far less tree cover, my state has a lot of climate variation over a very small area which makes it fascinating and frustrating to grow a garden.
That’s because the honey bee isn’t as suited for our environment as we think. Some studies say that honey bees are actually bad for native bee species by spreading disease.
I hate to say it but there are places where unfixed cats should absolutely be illegal and outdoor cats should be completely illegal. Honestly should just be outright banned in some places. Cat owners are largely not responsible.
Yes large actions should be taken ASAP to preserve native species. All feral cats and outdoor cats do is torture and skill native species for fun. Ecosystems require diversity to exist and cats are destroying it. Only reason cats have been able to exist as they have is because people find them cute.
REALLY amazing. The footage is just super beautiful. Very sharp. Lovely video. Cheers.
Zebra mussels have some benefits from what I understand in clearing up water and helping fish that benefit from that. I used to do biological surveys on the Illinois River and I remember hearing the biologist that supervised me talking about how it would be bad but it would also have some good effects.
Cool video! I saw several new video suggestions in the comments so I'm throwing one out there too! I think a countdown of the most successful reintroductions would be interesting, or maybe a countdown of the greatest species comeback from the brink of extinction.
Our native bees like the mason bees are way better at pollinating than the honey bees. One mason will pollinate as many flowers as dozens of honey bees.
IIRC you don't even use the term "invasive" if the species in question benefits the ecosystem it is introduced to.
Yeah introduced would be the more appropriate term as it’s more neutral and refers only to how a species got there (through human activity whether deliberate or not) while invasive means that the introduced organism is causing harm
Animals getting outcompeted by others better at filling their niche or beating their survival mechanisms is the history of evolution and natural selection.
I find it hard to get upset at invasive species for this reason. They are just more successful creatures.
I agree. Humans were domesticated by wheat. Not wheat was domesticated by humans. Being useful to humans is a winning survival strategy.
Land crabs might have 'ruined' golf courses, but golf courses ruin the natural environment.
Oh no not the gulf courses. 😱
the feral donkeys/burros of the Southwestern US are a notable example of a technically invasive species helping the ecosystem. The donkeys control brush, reduce wildfire risk, and bring the water table to the surface through the digging of “burro wells”.
Ty for explaining this as it was very helpful to see both viewpoints.
Ive read that honey bees compet with native bees by of course competing but ALSO pollenating non native plants.
Honey bees are one of the few inasive creatures i dont abduct from the wild as pets or put down becouse i know it might belong ti a farmers hive.
Honey bees are definitely a grey area invasive they are both beneficial and not beneficial
@@turtleman190 mostly benifitial to US. kinda like hows took the place of large grazing herbivores..
How many/what kind of invasive species, may I ask, _do_ you currently keep as pets?
What about species that are considered introduced or invasive that may have had historical occupation back during the Plio and Pleistocene?
Best example are the feral horses and camels in North America.
Hell, those two animals evolved here. And only died out around 10,000 years ago.
The evening-primrose _(Oenothera biennis)_ was introduced as a vegetable - the roots are really tasty! - from North America into Europe at ca 1620. It naturalized and has become common on ruderal sites where it forms absolutely no threat for the native flora and fauna!
Another invasive weed which was introduced from South America in many parts of the world (North America, Australia, Europe...) is the quickweed _(Galinsoga parviflora)_ . In Germany we call it the _Franzosenkraut_ ("Weed of the French") because the people assumed it was introduced by Napoleon's soldiers. It seems not to harm the native flora at least in Europe.
Invasive and introduced species are a completed issue. There are many species that have very negative impacts on the ecosystems they're introduced, but many species, including some of the same species that are highly negative on the environment, have beneficial aspects. I am on the side of the fence of managing, controlling, and if possible, removing non-native species from a novel environment. But I will recognize whatever beneficial aspects these species will have. In a perfect world, species would only go extinct through processes unrelated to current/historic (primarily post-agricultural societies) human factors, and species would be introduced to environments under similar circumstances. But we do not live in such a world. And we have make sound decisions and policies regarding such species that are the best for society and the environment.
if i recall the Horse is technically an invasive species to most of the world but really havent done any major damage to ecosystems and even actually helped them instead
Horses do terrible damage to habitats in Australia and degrade riverbanks with their hooves and destroy topsoil assisting erosion.
Technically, horses are actually native to North America. The native horses originally went extinct ~10,000 years ago when early Native Americans ate them all, and now the introduced horses are filling the old niche.
@@princevermilion8799 exactly. Australia is a place that has not had any native ungulates which means that all introduced ungulates are damaging to the various ecosystems, even camels in the desert.
@@thegreatbutterfly The American horse went extinct 15 000 years ago before native americans arrived in the continent. The ecosystem back then was not the same as it is now, so NO they are not filling an old niche, because the Horse went extinct precisely because its ecosystem changed (end of the Glacial Age Period) and they had no place in their "niche" anymore. So modern horse had a damaging impact on American ecosystem of today cause it wasnt planned on the natural evolution of the fauna and flora of the americas after the end of the Ice Age. Also American extinct Horse and Eurasian horse are vastly different.
Sable Island off Nova Scotia has wild horses, they were dumped there, they are in bad shape, they can't chew grass without a bunch of sand which grinds down their teeth!
In the UK there are several phasmid species that have made a home. They seem to have no negative impact as they simply nibble on very common plant species but are a food source for birds.
Hello Tsuki!! Can you made a series on the harm of seashell trade to environment?!?
I know you started your channel on aquarium trade and I would to hear your thoughts on it
You know what thanks for the positive video they are rare these day. I’m grateful.
about the bees stuff: no, honeybees are not good in places they arent native to, yes sure they polinise quite a lot due to having the biggest colonies betwen all bee species, but they are horrible polinators, they dont know how to properly polinate various plants and even actively compete and kill the native polinator species, which actually know how to polinate native species properly. here in brazil for exemple, we have an species of tree that needs an bit of an elaborate procedure to be polinisated, honeybees actively kill the species that know about this procedure, and when it comes to taking the place of the native bee the honeybee skips it all and simply depleted the plant from nectar and fecundation doesnt happen at all.
Despite being considered native to Australia the Dingo arrived with Aboriginal people and caused a huge problem for the then native fauna.
Woah! I saw the yellow-crowned night heron on Saturday two days ago at the LA zoo!
Also I bet you the cordgrass was introduced to be a substitute for roofing for sheds and barns, and to be used for weaving.
"dont say invasive species thats racist"
"ACTUALLY its beneficial to have these invasive species if you focus on select criteria only"
Neat analysis video! Thanks for uploading!
Hello, I am a biologist working with Invasive species. This video is an offense for me and my collegues. Literally misinformation. The last segment is just a pain to hear. And I challenge you all to hear it for a second time and tell me how an invasive specie with all of its downsides is better because is home to an endangered bird while the native one does exactly that without, well, being invasive. If you really want good ecology videos I can remember right now of Atlas Pro. This video is horrible and brings me a tear to my eye.
I thought the problem about the honey-bee is exactly that they are not as efficient pollinators as more specialized native species.
Another I'll add is from where I live, for once a rare instance of endangered animals being a benefit; the "island apple snail" is an invasive snail to south Florida, we have our own apple snail species (Florida apple snail) but it's numbers have been in decline, the "Snail Kite" is a bird native to the area and has also seen it's population decrease, however, in regions in which the island apple snail is found the recorded numbers of snail kites has risen, both combatting the spread of the invasive snail, and assisting the snail kites numbers.
That was quick, but interesting. Thanks
The first time I ever saw a Yellow-crowned Night-Heron was in Bermuda over 20 years ago. I had no idea they were introduced and had assumed they had arrived there on their own, much like Cattle Egrets.
An interesting one is Rosy Face Lovebirds in Arizona. Since they are completely dependent on human infrastructure, they remain confined only to the city. They use the abandoned homes of wood peckers and Hawaiian trees (which are also dependent on human infrastructure) so they have very little effect on the actual wild here.
Invasive cordgrass was a curse on Willapa Bay, Washington. It is being eradicated. It was covering the tidal flats used by shorebirds and many other groups of species.
As an Australian, I was raised on a steady diet of environmental awareness stuff like this, and I do think I have a good contender: Dungbeetles in Australia.
Humans brought agriculture with them, and the large-scale agriculture of European settlers brought with them agricultural animals, cheif among them sheep and cows.
now, Australia's ecology was basically 100% unprepared to deal with cowshit and it was becoming a problem, so some enterprising souls introduced dungbeetles to Australia to help clean up all the shit, and an impending ecological crisis was actually intentionally and successfully averted.
I haven't ever heard of invasive Dungbeetles wiping anything out either, so I think it's one of the rare few successful introductions.
_"The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world."_
Just vacationed in Peru and lake Titicaca is full of cord grass, with whole floating towns living on the lake on 6:22 huge mats made of the grass. Also you can eat the root part, not much taste to it but you can eat it.
I Thought i remembered seeing a thing about how our support of honey bees caused a decline in other pollinators and now that the honey bee is struggling we are trying to keep it alive so we dont screw ourselves over worse
Will you make a video about animals considered native but in reality they are invasive?
Yeah thats a great idea but might be a little hard to research. I'll give it a go at some point im sure :)
@@TsukiCove thanks
@@TsukiCove in the UK there are many examples of animals that people consider native but were introduced. Ring neck pheasant, rabbit, hare, many deer species, grey squirrel, vole, some game birds, Canada geese, house mice, black and brown rats, etc.
The Australian dingo could definitely be on that list. You will get attacked for saying it's not native in Australia
@@turtleman190 hmmm yeah that was the first species that sprang to mind but given that the dingo has been in Australia long enough to be considered naturalized calling it invasive would justifiably be contentious. We know it drove native predators like the thylacine and Tasmanian devil extinct on the mainland but the ecosystem adapted and they became distinct enough as a species to be considered native. Wild dogs, hybridized domestic dogs that interbred with nearby dingo populations are a different story.
Great video 👍
We need to work on getting yabbies into Florida 👍
In NA the SW Willow Flycatcher utilizes the invasive Tamarix scrub as habitat. I found this interesting.
The biggest problem with invasive species is that, regardless of whether it's an mammal, bird, fish, insect or plant, they don't stay in the areas where they should naturally be, but instead spread to areas where they don't belong at all, and this poses a threat to the old species and sensitive ecosystem that were in the area before their invasion. For this reason, the species should stay in the areas where they should naturally be and not spread to new areas because it is harmful and unnatural and the earth cannot withstand even a small change. For example, the black rat is an invasive species that arrived in Europe from Asia during the Iron Age and has caused great destruction ever since, because no rat would naturally belong in Europe. And the balance of nature that was lost with the invasion could be regained and efforts to repair the its damage could only be made if invasive species were removed from areas where they don't belong and limited to areas where they should stay. Therefore, states and nation unions need effective programs to solve invasive species.
One that I can't figure out are the Chinese and European mantises in North America. I first read an article saying they were indisputably bad, but it was from a Nature Conservatory, Brandywine, and not a scientific publication. One of the claims it made was that they were a threat to native hummingbird population, which was disputed by the National Audubon Society (they have caught hummingbirds, but it's incredably rare and they post no real threat to their populations) the other claim is they have displaces native species, which seems plausible, but there has never been any research into this, despite it being stated as fact (without citing sources) And the majority of the other articles make these points and cite the Brandywine article. On the flip side there are just as many sources claiming they're "Naturalized" (without citing sources for that claim either), but both species have been here for over 100 years, and native species are doing fine . The only concrete claim I was able to confirm is that the USDA APHIS, the agencies trying to control indisputably bad species like BMSB and Spotted Lanternfly, allow Chinese and Euro mantis egg masses to be sold and transported through the mail for intentional release as a form of pest control. There are no eradication efforts against them as they are beneficial as generalist predators rather than being an ecological stressor like an invasive pest, and there are a lot of other invasive predators that we consider indisputably "good" like the House Centipede and the Masked Hunter Assassin Bug. I've gone as far as to email people in the USDA and Entomology professors, and they won't say "good or bad" one way or the other, which is satisfying I guess. Things in nature rarely have "good" and "Bad" absolutes, perhaps they inhabit some grey area, do a little good, do a little bad. But the common belief held by most people is that they're this huge problem, in no small part to these informal nature blogs repeating this unfounded Brandywine article.
I read that although honey bees are great pollinators there are so many different species of insects that also spread pollen including bunches of species of wasp that are native to North America. I don’t think honey bees are necessary or bring as many benefits as they may seem especially because they dominate other species and drive down their numbers substantially
I completely agree with honeybees. Yes, they're pollinators, but people are actively allowing native pollinators to die out and actively not protecting them in favour of honeybees simply because of the ascribed economic value of honey and farming. Yes, superficially beneficial, but at the cost of native species. You can simply switch them out.
great video
Wow! At 2:54 into the video I saw where you captured a Turkey Vulture on film. I'd known that featherless head anywhere. Didn't know that they flew to Bermuda though.
I was a little confused with the title of the video, since the term invasive species is more often used for a species that has a negative effect on the ecosystem. These species are not always non-native.
What is your opinion regarding the "it isn't the verona mite that is the problem but neonicotinoids that caused the demise of bees..."
I'm a chick forest technician from Montreal, I majored in Sylviculture, my daughter's a biologist and more on board with live and let live but cats are pets thrown out by humans!
whats so interesting is that Bermuda was first discovered by Spain but first colonised by Britain
"Discovered"
Sorry to burst your bubble there, but the Western Honeybee (Apis Mellifera) does not pollinate tomatoes. The native Bumblebees will when nothing else is available, as in a greenhouse operation.
Native to central America, Melipona spp., are the bees that the tomatoes get pollinated by. Being tropical, they're not found in colder areas of the continents.
Tomatoes have tube structures that the pollen sits inside. These bees have evolved to shake that pollen loose by a process called "Sonification." A buzzing that stimulates the pollen to drop.
Gardeners in N. America brought over "Meadow Rue" a lovely flower that grows in England in damp places. As is typical with invasive species, they escaped and started pushing out native plants. Worse, they were not a food source for native animals..
But somebody got smart and searched for a reason why Meadow Rue hasn't taken over the English countryside. Found an insect that eats its leaves. The national ag officials here kept them in an enclosure for 5 decades to make sure they weren't bringing over any hitchhikers diseases or other pests.
Nah. They were good.
Released about 20 years ago, they've done a wonderful job controlling the Meadow Rue, which is now just another lovely flower in our damp areas.
Although, still [sigh] they don't feed anything here.
I think the Ring Neck Pheasants introduction to the USA has been beneficial
Can you make a video about the top 5 most dangerous animals in europe?
Yeah i could do at some point thanks for the suggestion :)
The question is dangerous under what circumstances?
Think of Mosquito vs Tiger in Asia...
I'd say one of the biggest threats to humans is the wild boar. It goes into cities, can be very aggressive, and has the means to outrun and maul humans... Plus, we aren't allowed to hunt it in cities, let alone shoot them... In the case of domesticated animals dogs, horses, and cows would probably rank high. They easily outcompete bears who are next to extinct...
Some birds can pause a serious threat to climbers and mountainbikers. Otherwise, they would be incapable of doing sufficient damage. Then there are animals that kill indirectly by causing drivers to hit obstacles...
@@edi9892 Dangerous in terms of causing serious harm or even death in both provoked and unprovoked attacks. If i had to make my own list this will be it
1. Portuguese Man O War
Its a siphonophore that has venom so strong it can cause an allergic reaction that blocks your airway and stops your heart.
2. European adder
Its a snake that only bites when provoked but has venom which can cause blood blisters and extreme allergic reaction which will take you a year to recover from, if you recover at all. In sweden there's about 1300 recorded bites a year.
3. European brown bear
Pretty self explanatory, there are around 37 brown bear attacks in europe per year with most of them occuring in eastern europe.
4. Wild boar
Everything that you said.
5. Moose
Extremely dangerous in both provoked and unprovoked situations, but its worse when its provoked. Also moose cause some really fatal car accidents because when you hit a moose with a car the moose has a very high chance of falling on top of your car, crushing both you and your car.
@@danielbogdanoski4412 I'd put cows a lot higher on my personal list. To me, they are the most hostile creatures I've met. I had it twice that they charged at me and crashed through their fence without me doing anything to provoke them. Technically, I've had more dogs trying to take a bite out of me, but unless they're big, I have little to worry about...
@@edi9892 Well these lists mainly focus on wild animals but yeah some domesticated animals can be pretty dangerous. Whats your top 5 list?
Speaking of humboldt bay California. I live two blocks away. We also have quite a few egrets in the area that aren't native. Idk if they're beneficial but they are beautiful.
In Australia, the non-native pond apple is a favourite food of the southern cassowary
Honey bees have been extremely harmful to native ecosystem in NA, it’s not just to the native bees. While they are generalist pollinators, they are still a bit selective and often will favor non-native plants. This can cause cascading effects on an ecosystem.
The fox in Australia has done a great job there and also the big Toad they brought there.
I thought the cane toad had a negative impact.
Didnt this young dude posted videos some years ago about the many varieties of betta fish?? I remember seeing them but i cant find them...
There's more than two species of heron in the Americas. For example the great blue heron.
Wild horses in north america, and bananas in mesoamerican, are great examples of good invasive species.
Australia had native honey bees who evolved to not have stingers prior to the introduction of european honey bees.
The invasive Lupines in Iceland could be an example, colonizing essentially bare ground
Maybe this is a Jen gripe moment, but I remember there being three classifications of life, that being native, naturalized and invasive. Native life was organisms that were native to the area, naturalized were organisms that were not native but not harmful, and invasive being organisms that were not native and harmful to the ecosystem they are in. What happened to the term “naturalized”? Did everyone just become too polarized and drop it altogether? As for species that are beneficial, I know of one that falls into a gray area for me. This is (Elaeagnus umbellata) the autumn olive. It was brought over to America to aid in soil retention and farmers quickly got into the habit of growing by fruit trees because they fix nitrogen to the soil, causing the trees to produce more fruit. The fruit of the autumn olive has more lycopene than a tomato and can be made into a jelly that is similar to cranberry jelly. All manner of native wildlife love it’s berries, birds happily nest in it’s branches and barren ground is made fertile for native plants by it’s nitrogen fixing properties. The reason it is considered an invasive species is because it makes the soil too fertile for poor soil loving native plants and because the seeds spread so much due to it’s massive berry production.
Yes, but it crowds out native shrubs that are much better (more nutritious) for birds. It can also completely shade out desirable herbaceous cover, and prevent tree re-generation. I spend a lot of time killing autumn olives!
Just gonna clarify invasive and introduced are different invasive ones specifically have to be detrimental to the ecosystem
The honey bees sounded like a stretch, considering they don't seem to have much of a benefit on the ecosystem, only on human businesses, which aren't really the same thing.
Very interesting perspective
The most invasive species on this planet is... the golf course.
How about gobies in Lake Erie and Huron? They are providing for countless smallmouth bass and walleyes. Salmon as well in the Great Lakes are also introduced species to feed on alewives (also an introduced species). Plenty of examples in North America
One miss here... the introduction of freshwater trout and salmonids to the southern hemisphere has been a huge benefit to places like Argentina, Chile and New Zealand. Not only from an environmental perspective but also economically. The rivers and lakes these fish now inhabit were once void of any game fish entirely. All of those countries have done extensive impact studies on their introductions and every one agrees that these introductions were overwhelmingly beneficial
I love that no one ever brings up the fact that the most damaging invasive species are humans
it's just because it's so obvious, most of the invasive species in the world are invasive because of humans and humans are destroying the world everybody knows that
The way I see it, these species are bound to find each other at some point in the future. It sucks for those that are out-classes by the non-native species, but in the end that's what natural selection decides. Although many would disagree, even humans are part of that same nature. The chaos that follows after humans is profound, but ultimately another natural feature at work. If species can't find a niche amongst it, well, that's just it. Eventually the sea turtles that can distinguish between jellyfish and garbage will survive. We can try to reduce garbage all we want, but we are only delaying and, honestly, disrupting natural selection by doing so. It's like medication. We can delay our death and extend our lives by carefully drugging ourselves, but when that one disaster happens that medicines are not available the humans who relied on them will perish. Of course we could never know exactly what traits are necessary for the longest survival of a species because the great filters are unknown, but at this point it's just reverse evolution.
there's some purple flower introduced to iceland which fixes the soil and draws in tourism
00:50 one of the most invasive species could be sitting next to you(me).
Turns to see coworkers.
Native bee populations in the US are also declining mainly due to use of pesticides and global warming.
It’s pretty clear that honeybees aren’t benefiting the native ecosystem of North America but the introduced Eurasian crops. The native bees pollinate the native crops you listed.
The possibility for the herons to endanger the crabs on Bermuda is genuine, and the golf course is not an ecosystem either. It’s a built environment just like a parking lot or farm field.
The Spartina is interesting, but the issue there is that the native spartina also provides habitat. If the native cordgrass can be maintain and expanded then the rail will readily near there. Besides, one rail benefiting from the invasive while more species suffer is not “benefiting the ecosystem”.
This video, while pointing out interesting introduction cases, ultimately incorrectly equates humans’ built environment and objectives with ecosystem health, though they are typically not aligned.
Asian green muscle.
Out competing with native Florida muscles and barnacles, they clog power plants water in take pipes.
But the sheepshead(native fish of North America) love them
Have any studies been done on the ecological impact red foxes have had on the Falklands? Seeing as the local seabird population there was already used to predation by the now extinct Falklands Island wolf, I imagine the fox filled that necessary niche quite comfortably.
You're just playing around with semantics in this video. Do not downplay the affects of invasive species by providing examples that are not considered invasive species. Invasive species are organisms that are specifically non-native AND cause economic and/or ecological and/or human health problems. All Invasive species are introduced but not all introduced species are Invasive.
For example, the bird you mention was introduced by scientists as a bio-control to replace an extinct relative. Do not conflate this purposeful scientific introduction with invasive species. That is the same sentiment held in the past that led to the introduction of invasive species across the world by people who do not understand.
The grass you mention is invasive. Don't try to twist it around. It nearly destroyed SF Bay by choking it out. Hybridization 99% of the time is BAD. It's hybridized form changed native marsh into meadow. When you completely change the ecosystem you always cause more negative that positive.
This kind of rhetoric is why conservationists are having problems with the public.
That Black and Red Devil Crab is almost as scary as the Coconut Crab
An invasive snail in Everglades is helping the Snail Kite which is endangered.
Hey, I could be crazy. But what if we just universalized the planet’s ecosystem?
The truth is that not all invasive species are harmful, but if we didn't f with the ecosystem in the first place we wouldn't need to f with it any more, so please keep things as native as possible.
The case of cats as an invasive species is especially interesting to me.
Apart from being invasive, they have another unfair advantage: being pets. Even if the ecosystem could not support a permanent population of cats, heathcare and feeding through humans makes sure they cannot go extinct in any ecosystem, no matter how inhospitable it is to cats (exept underwater I guess)
*begins the scuba kitten program*