ERADICATING INVASIVE SPECIES WITH FINALITY

ERADICATING INVASIVE SPECIES WITH FINALITY

We Filipinos are not lacking in laws. In fact, when it comes to the control and eradication of invasive species, we already have what I would call “fully cooked laws.” But when it comes to implementation, the situation looks “half baked”—or worse, “half-hearted.”

Take the case of tilapia. Originally from Africa, it was introduced here decades ago and has since become so common in our diets that many think of it as “native.” But let’s be clear: no matter how long an invasive species has been here, it will never truly be native.

The bigger issue is not their presence per se, but their impact. Invasive fish such as tilapia, African catfish, carp, and the dreaded janitor fish do more than just share space with native species. They outcompete, intrude, and destroy. They eat the fingerlings and eggs of native fish, causing populations to dwindle or vanish.

This presents an economic paradox. On one hand, invasive species like tilapia provide livelihoods for countless Filipino fish farmers. On the other, they deprive others of income by undermining the survival of native species that once sustained traditional fisheries.

So here is the question: Do we strike a balance and live with invasive species—or do we pursue eradication with finality?

Looking at the Options

In my view, the answer requires more than guesswork or gut feel. We need a comprehensive economic study led by NEDA, PIDS, BFAR, DOST, the UP Marine Science Institute, and the UP College of Fisheries and Oceanic Studies. Only then can we weigh the true costs and benefits of invasive versus native species farming.

That said, some things are already obvious. Invasive species that are useless for food—like knife fish and janitor fish—should be eradicated completely, no questions asked.

Other countries offer lessons. In Hawai‘i, officials launched the campaign “Eat ‘em to Beat ‘em”, encouraging locals and chefs to serve invasive fish like ta‘ape (bluestripe snapper). Culinary festivals and home cooking alike turned a threat into an asset. By creating demand, populations of invasives in the wild could be reduced.

This approach could work in the Philippines too—with one major condition: commercial farming of these invasives must also be banned. Otherwise, we risk creating a market that fuels their spread rather than reduces it.

A Philippine Strategy

Here’s what I suggest as a long-term roadmap:

  1. Shift Incentives. Provide subsidies and support for farming native and endemic species, so fish farmers have good alternatives to tilapia and African catfish.

  2. Ban Imports of Exotic Aquarium Fish. Many invasives, like janitor fish, started as escaped pets. Preventing future escapes should be a priority.

  3. Promote Culinary Use. Encourage Filipinos to eat certain invasives where safe, but strictly prohibit their commercial breeding.

  4. Invest in Breeding Programs. Government research centers should expand efforts to propagate and commercialize native fish such as maliputo (Largemouth river mullet of Batangas) or ayungin (silver perch of Laguna de Bay), both prized but now threatened.

  5. Protect Endemic Species. Species found only in the Philippines—our biological treasures—deserve special conservation funding and community protection programs.

Why This Matters

Invasive species are not just a biodiversity issue. They are an economic problem and a food security problem. According to studies by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), invasives cost global economies billions of dollars annually through reduced yields, degraded habitats, and added control expenses.

Here in the Philippines, Laguna de Bay is a prime example. Once abundant with native ayungin and kanduli, it is now dominated by tilapia, janitor fish, and carp. Native species have become scarce and expensive, shifting food away from ordinary Filipinos’ tables.

Toward Finality

“Finality” may sound ambitious—after all, once invasive species establish themselves, total eradication is rare. But we can aim for strategic reduction and ecological balance. What matters is having a clear policy direction: do we want to keep nurturing invasive species at the expense of our own? Or do we want to restore our rivers, lakes, and seas with the biodiversity that is truly ours?

For me, the path is clear: shift away from invasives, promote natives, and use every policy, culinary, and cultural tool we can to make it happen. Half-baked laws will not save our ecosystems. Only decisive, whole-hearted implementation will.

The question is: do we have the will to act with finality—or will we keep living with the irony of eating our way into ecological decline?

Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres
iseneres@yahoo.com, senseneres.blogspot.com

01-29-2026

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

HOW IS THE CRIME RATE COMPUTED IN THE PHILIPPINES?

HOW IS THE CRIME RATE COMPUTED IN THE PHILIPPINES? When we talk about the crime rate in the Philippines, we often assume that the figures we see are accurate reflections of reality. But have we ever paused to ask—how exactly is the crime rate computed? Where does this data come from, and how reliable is it? The computation of the crime rate in the Philippines is officially handled by the Philippine National Police (PNP). The formula itself is straightforward: Crime Rate = (Total Reported Crimes / Total Population) x 100,000 This simple equation gives us the number of crimes per 100,000 people, allowing for fair comparison across regions and time periods. However, the reality behind these numbers is more complex than it appears. Data from the Ground The foundation of our national crime rate is empirical data collected at the grassroots level—from individual police stations scattered across the country. Every reported crime is logged in local police blotters, forming the buil...
Read more

GREY AREAS IN GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS

GREY AREAS IN GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS Dear Mr. President: May I ask who is going to be the arbiter or referee whenever there are overlaps in functions between two or more government agencies? I imagine that there would be no problem if these agencies would just cooperate and collaborate with each other, but what if they are unable to settle their differences and they would just end up throwing blame at each other or finger pointing at each other? Allow me to cite some examples. Who is supposed to take the lead in waste to energy projects? Is it supposed to be the DENR that is supposed to handle waste? Or is it supposed to be the DOE that is supposed to handle energy generation? Or is it supposed to be the DILG since it is the one that could direct or influence the waste to energy projects of LGUs? Who is supposed to take the lead in producing and promoting the use of biofuels? Is it supposed to be the DA, since the production of biofuels is supposed to be all about planting biofuel ...
Read more

LOCALIZED FREE AMBULANCE SERVICES

LOCALIZED FREE AMBULANCE SERVICES As it is supposed to be, anyone in the Philippines should be able to dial 911, and a telephone operator should be able to dispatch fire, rescue, ambulance and police (FRAP) units as soon as possible, based on acceptable response times. I invented the FRAP acronym for easy recall, and I hope it sticks, if there is no other alternative. Unfortunately, due to a mixture of technical and political reasons, the Philippines has not adopted 911 as a national number, because some LGUs would rather use their own three-digit numbers such as 117 and 168. I actually proposed a technical solution to that problem, but it was not adopted either. For whatever it is worth, my solution is to install a call forwarding system that could route all calls to a central operator, regardless of what number is dialed. It is very sad for me to know that up to now, even if our country is already over one hundred years old, there are still many LGUs that do not have fire trucks. it ...
Read more