56 pages • 1 hour read
Mary RoachA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
The author visits the Vatican to talk with Rafael Tornini, the Vatican Director of Gardens and Garbage, about pest control. Green parrots are the problem animal in the Vatican’s gardens because they eat seeds (240); however, they are seen as part of the system and not controlled. Pope Francis decreed that biological controls, such as beneficial insects and bats, should be undertaken instead of chemical ones (241). Upon seeing a large compost pile, Roach inquires about rats. Tornini responds that they are a big problem, so measures have to be taken against them.
Curious about how the treatment of rats squares with Pope Francis’s environmental encyclical, On Care for Our Common Home, which states that “Each creature has its own purpose […] None is superfluous” (244), she talks to bioethicist Father Carlo Casalone at the Pontifical Academy for Life. Father Casalone explains that in the encyclical, the pope points out how St. Francis referred to water, the sun, and the moon as brothers and sisters. Roach brings up rodents, to which he says that siblings do not always get along, and sometimes, people have to deal with negative situations (244).
Roach presses for details on dealing with the problems, citing the example of Canadian geese being killed for defecating on golf courses. Casalone suggests taking into account not just the resources spent on a sport but also the workers who might depend on the golf course for employment (246). He states that broader-minded interventions are needed when handling animal problems. In the case of a coyote killing someone’s pet, the author does not receive a clear answer on how to weigh “the feelings of the person versus the life of the predator” (246), though the bioethicist says that human free will is important to remember when deciding how to deal with animal instincts (247).
Casalone tells her of the reintroduction of wolves in northern Italy to take care of the overpopulation of wild pigs and deer (247). However, the wolves have started preying on livestock, becoming a problem themselves. Roach tells him of mongooses, a diurnal animal, being introduced to Hawaii to handle nocturnal rats (247).
The yellow-eyed penguin of New Zealand is endangered. Part of the species’ decline is from habitat loss and getting caught in fishing nets, but a significant factor is the presence of introduced predators: stoats, rats, and feral cats (252).
In 1863, European settlers released six rabbits into New Zealand’s Otago Peninsula to remind them of their original homes. Nine years later, the land was overrun with rabbits. They starved out sheep and birds, which sent landholders into bankruptcy (254). The government passed the Rabbit Nuisance Act of 1881, allowing for not only the shooting and poisoning of rabbits but also the introduction of predatory stoats and ferrets (254). However, the stoats went after more than just the rabbits, consuming bird and turtle eggs and even adult birds and reptiles. Many of New Zealand’s native birds cannot fly, as they evolved without predators and, thus, the need to escape quickly. By 2019, more than three-quarters of New Zealand’s land vertebrates were endangered or faced extinction (254). Thus, the government started Predator Free 2050 (PF2050) to eliminate the three most problematic invasive species: stoats, brushtail possums, and rats (254). The traps set out for the stoats are meant to be humane, using a rod at the end of a piston to hit the brain, which is a fast death.
The author meets up with Bruce Warburton, who designs humane traps and animal welfare standards used to evaluate the humaneness of traps. Humane traps work quickly to bring an animal to unconsciousness or death. Traps that kill small animals quickly by breaking their necks take longer with larger animals, as the mechanism then works by strangulation and suffocation (258). A blow to the head is the swiftest, most humane way to dispatch an animal. As stoats have long, muscular necks, Warburton has modified snap traps to guide the animal’s head into just the right spot so that the bar comes down by the ears, providing instant unconsciousness (259). Standard snap traps for mice sometimes catch the animal by a limb or snout, which inflicts pain. Glue traps are not considered humane, as the animals often either die slowly of dehydration or tear through their own limbs trying to escape. Therefore, glue traps have been outlawed in New Zealand and various European countries (260-61).
Researchers have looked into replacing leg traps with traps that use carbon dioxide, considered a humane manner of death. However, at high enough levels to quickly cause unconsciousness, the gas may form an acid that causes burning and choking (262). Electronic traps have similar benefits and drawbacks. They’re fast when clean, but they can burn an animal’s legs if they’re not. New Zealand mandates that electronic traps must deliver unconsciousness in under three minutes (263).
PF2050, however, also uses poison to get rid of rats, though poison takes effect over many hours or even days. New Zealand sees this as necessary because of the rat’s high numbers, fast reproduction, and the remoteness of some of the areas where they are found. In studies, cyanide emerges as the most humane poison because it renders a victim unconscious in as little as a minute. Sometimes, the chemicals cause spasming, which appears painful, but if the animal is unconscious, it would be unaware of it (265). People seeing the spasms often do not understand that the recipient is unconscious and protest the treatment. This is why lethal injections for humans contain a paralytic, and the pesticide Avitrol, which works as a frightening device for birds though it kills a few, created a public outrage even though it was declared humane. Many pest control measures have unintended consequences, like the “Humane Coyote Getter,” a type of cyanide injector that ended up killing cows and dogs and, consequently, faces bans and lawsuits.
Anticoagulants are often used in rat poison, but death only comes after one to three days, so New Zealand doesn’t use them. Instead, PF2050 uses 1080, a weaponized form of ricin, to get rid of invasive mammals. The country’s only native mammals are bats, which have no interest in the bait, and the bait is dyed to be unattractive to birds (267). Deer that were introduced to New Zealand for hunting stock are sensitive to 1080, so the aerial drops also contain deer repellant (268). Some of New Zealand’s native birds are scavengers, so there is concern about secondary poisoning, and repellants for keas are in the works (268).
The author is impressed by how the public has embraced PF2050 and anti-invasive sentiments. One researcher speculates that it’s because the deaths occur mainly at night and in forests. Warburton, the man tasked with designing traps, decries the double standard of people raging against stoats for killing native birds when their cats and dogs also kill them. He would like housecats to be illegal (269). This raises questions for the author about where we draw the line for what to protect and what to embrace.
At the National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC) in Colorado, researchers are experimenting with gene drives on mice to find humane alternatives to poisons for pest control. The mice in the experiment are genetically modified to bear only male offspring (276). Such modifications take generations to take effect and be studied for unforeseen downstream consequences, so the enclosures at the laboratory must be secure against the gnawing mice.
Genetic modification uses CRISPR, an enzyme of bacteria, to locate, cut, and replace specific sequences of DNA. This is used to modify the mice, which will then be released on an island with a mouse problem so that the population eventually decreases. Gene drives make it so that the targeted trait is inherited by all of the offspring, not just half. However, to have an effect on the island’s population, a large number of gene-drive mice would have to be introduced, thus temporarily making the problem worse (281). There are other issues, too. The gene-drive manipulation of the embryo has to happen at exactly the right stage of embryonic development or it won’t work. Polyandry, having more than one father of a litter of offspring, occurs frequently in wild mice, so more modified males are needed. It is also unknown whether the existing population of mice will mate with the modified ones (281). Moreover, there are concerns about what might happen if a genetically modified animal escapes its controlled area and mates with other populations. However, scientists are working on a way not only to keep gene-drive animals from mating with outside populations through their own genes, but some researchers have developed a way to reverse the gene drives on fruit flies (282).
Another cutting-edge approach is to use bait laced with species-specific interfering RNA (RNAi), which could treat certain genes key for the target species’ life processes as viral RNA and destroy it (283). It is promising but still several years away from getting approval for widespread use. One issue for RNAi, as for all traps using bait, is that the animals who avoid the trap or learn to stay away from it will continue to procreate and be the harder ones to eliminate (283). California faced this issue with invasive nutria and had to radio-collar neutered nutria to locate the remaining “holdouts” (284).
What worries the author is that the list of animal pests is long, and the NWRC is part of the USDA, which protects farmers, so the decision to wipe out certain pests may be entirely financial (285). Jane Goodall spoke out against gene drives at a Genetic Biocontrol of Invasive Rodents meeting, stating that the technology is moving too fast and without guidelines and, therefore, should be stopped (285). Unforeseen developments, such as driving a species to extinction or altering an ecosystem, worry some experts.
The author visits a man named Roger, who operates a feedlot for cattle. One of the NWRC researchers gets his mice from the man’s property. Though the mice eat the feed, Roger figures it is not enough to be noticeable. His biggest concern is that they nest in machinery and chew wires, so he keeps barn cats, though the cats get hit by cars or taken by owls (287). He has foxes, so the rat population is kept in check, too. Blackbirds also come to eat the corn, but Roger doesn’t shoot them or use frightening devices because he’s seen how ineffective they are, and they don’t eat enough of the corn to be a problem. Roger gives the author hope about more people embracing coexistence with animals and using more humane methods to accomplish their goals.
The final chapters in the book focus more on bioethics and rethinking human relationships with wildlife, particularly pests. The pope’s encyclical promotes the idea of seeing every creature or element of nature as part of humanity’s family and recognizing that no part of nature is truly expendable or worthless. However, Roach wonders where the Vatican—or any organization or person—draws the line between What We Choose to Protect or to Kill. She examines what “humane” means and the implications of coexistence. Still, the incorporation of a religious authority is another instance of ethos, appealing to broader ethical and existential concerns rather than strictly scientific ones.
When Roach sees that the Vatican has a rat problem, she is told that measures have to be taken against the negative aspects of any relationship, but the Pope encourages people to use the least harmful methods if they must act against a pest. While less environmentally harmful methods of pest control are used at the Vatican to control harmful insects, it is unclear what methods are employed for the rat problem. Roach wonders why some species receive “the designation of […] pests. That is, under what circumstances should a species be exempt from moral protections against extermination or cruelty?” (242). The bioethicist tells her to consider all the factors in play, such as the animal’s instinct. Humans, however, have an added responsibility because “Human beings […] have free will. They are responsible for the stewardship of creation. Their role is to help nature. Because we can study the system, and the animals cannot” (247). That capability of understanding the system and acting in accordance with that understanding is important, as is demonstrated in New Zealand.
New Zealand’s native ecosystems have suffered greatly from human inhabitants, not just through habitat loss and climate change but through the introduction of invasive species. Early settlers wanted to replicate their European homelands by bringing rabbits, which overran the countryside in a few short years. This shows the danger of not understanding the system into which something new is introduced. Ecosystems have a balance between predators and prey in a food web, but introduced species can upset that balance. Consequently, some of the naturalists most involved in protecting native plant and animal species are also involved in killing other species, such as Bruce Warburton who has “professional affiliations with both the National Pest Control Agencies and the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee” (256). His concern is the humaneness of Mitigation Efforts in the Human-Animal Conflict. Humane in this sense means “a function of speed: speed of death, yes, but more critically, speed to unconsciousness—to feeling and knowing nothing” (257). He explains his approach to animal euthanasia as remembering that animals “have the capacity to suffer. We have a duty of care to think about it, to minimize their suffering” (261-62). New Zealand, therefore, has set standards for how long an animal trap can take to induce unconsciousness. They look for new techniques to minimize the suffering and the damage to non-target species. Roach cites the country’s PF2050 as one possible path forward, though the strategy is complicated by the enduring question of which animals are considered pests. Warburton’s lingering question about housecats killing birds invites further meditation on this question.
The genetic modifications of gene drives are another way to accomplish that goal, as they are painless and species-specific. However, though scientists may think an area is controlled, such as an island, and genetically modified entities cannot leave that zone, nature often finds a way. Roach states, “It’s the unknown unknowns that trouble some biologists” (285). The introduction of species that turn out to be invasive is ongoing, showing that the researchers behind those decisions have not considered all the factors within a system and how new species will interact with it. Invasive species are another example of The Impact of Urbanization.
Roach raises a larger question at the end, which is not just how to weigh one life over another but whether the first step could just be coexistence. She imagines:
[A] possible future where people may be frustrated by wild animals that get up in their business but they’re living with them. In that possible future, people’s reaction to the damage brought about by wildlife is something akin to acceptance. Or maybe resignation is closer (288-89).
She proposes a different model for viewing the issue of pest control: “Perhaps the model should be shoplifting. Supermarkets and chain stores don’t poison shoplifters; they come up with better ways to outsmart them” (289). It’s a point she has been driving at for much of the book: Animal behavior is what it is, while humanity’s behaviors and approaches to nature are what need reassessing.
Plus, gain access to 9,150+ more expert-written Study Guides.
Including features:
By Mary Roach
Animals in Literature
View Collection
Common Reads: Freshman Year Reading
View Collection
Earth Day
View Collection
Equality
View Collection
Laugh-out-Loud Books
View Collection
Mortality & Death
View Collection
New York Times Best Sellers
View Collection
Science & Nature
View Collection
True Crime & Legal
View Collection