The Owl’s Corner: Invasive Species

October 10, 2012 by  
Filed under Owl's Corner


What is the best way to handle

invading animals and plants from other parts of the world?

Sylvie asks:

Being an ecologist, I am regularly confronted by invasive species, as new plant and animal species are regularly introduced into new, foreign environments by human activities, and will cause important damages and kills. So I wonder about how the beings want us to react.

  1. Is it our responsibility to restore balance by moving or (quite often) kill the invaders?
  2. Would the animals and plants cope alone with the problem, and let the nature take care of it, knowing that maybe hundreds of individual will die?

I find it very difficult to decide what to do for helping and would like to know what animals and plants are feeling about this.


Please comment ONLY if you are

a professional Animal Communicator.

Please include your name and website.
Thank you


2 Responses to “The Owl’s Corner: Invasive Species”
  1. tula says:

    I am married to someone who believes we should use chemical extermination of bugs/ants/”pests”. What do I do? How can I get them to perhaps move away from the areas on our property that they are seen and encountered so they can be protected and he won’t use chemicals? Any suggestions? I get a terrible feeling whenever I have disrupted what might be an ant hill to see if it is still active and find there are still ants in it.

  2. spiritweave says:

    First of all, I wish to express my deep appreciation for the thoughtfulness and profundity of your highly important question. Thank you for the opportunity to reflect on this issue from unconventional vantage points. Perhaps I should apologize in advance for the length of this response, but a more succinct one is not really in keeping with the question.

    Before delving into the heart of the matter, I also wish to emphasize that I am not a scientist. I can surmise, in generalities only, the consequences to which you refer. I am the first to acknowledge that I do not know the complexities of the hazards posed by distinct species being introduced into specific non-native locales. Please be assured that the viewpoints shared below, while possibly divergent from some of your own, are offered with complete respect and appreciation for your profession. The animals and plants who have eagerly responded are enthused by your questions and associated yearning for clarity – and they radiate gratitude for your palpably heartfelt desire to do that which is in the best interest of all.

    They lovingly invite you to reassess a number of premises:

    • Who is to say what (or who) “belongs” in any given place at any given time? They see the generally-accepted human definition of the word “native” as being rather limited by our concepts of time and history. They wish for us to understand that everything came from somewhere else. Movement is natural for all. Exploration is a part of life and diversity is valued.
    • How do humans define “damage”? The plants and animals perceive that often by this we mean change. Yet what determines whether change is classified as good or bad? By “good”, do we infer status quo or something controllable as such? If so, they wish for us to entertain the possibility that such an expectation may be contrary to the natural flow of expansion and growth – which is both inherent in and inevitable for life of all forms.
    • Are humans intended to be at the helm of responsibility? This is meant neither as provocation for religious debate nor as invitation to surrender accountability for our own actions. By all means, interspecies respect is beyond appropriate. But could it be that, at times, even well-meaning humans extend a disservice to other species by assuming an elevated role of leadership? To be in such a position, might one not need a broader perspective than humanity has available? Do we genuinely have the knowingness to comprehend the intricacies of Nature’s balance? Could Mother Nature, the Earth itself, and a great many of the individual inhabitants have greater intelligence than we tend to credit them with? (Your very questioning of the animals and plants confirms recognition of their astuteness, of course.) Those representatives who contributed to this discussion invite us to broaden our perspectives. They wish to assure us that Nature always balances herself, yet is seldom as unbalanced as we may believe. They see humans as commonly having a false belief in their need to control – which, in truth, is based in fear. They invite us to ponder the benefits of trusting in the all-pervasive goodness and wisdom of the Universe. Words are inadequate to convey the richness and fullness of their message. If language were able to do it justice, there would be no hint or question of Pollyanna naiveté.
    • By the same token, what constitutes a “problem”? In this case, ultimately, the potential for innumerable deaths. Do humans and other species view death comparably? As a generality, no. Again, they invite us to reflect on our related beliefs and fears. Their tendency is to relax in a much stronger awareness that their essence continues a delightfully lavish and varied existence on the other side of the “veil.” Not to diminish the intention of relishing the physical experience to the fullest, the prospect of transitioning to a different realm is not accompanied by a sense of dread, or even termination, that many of us have.

    Profound questions have a way of generating even more of the same. But the plants and animals do not wish to amplify our confusion. They would like for us to be able to see the magnificent dance that is taking place. It is an intensely dynamic, multi-layered, and kaleidoscopic ballet that they describe. Despite outward appearances, they claim that participant members have consented to the new interrelationships and shared environments. Does this imply that we can expect only that which we deem as harmony amongst them? No. But as they welcome new adventures and interactions – with whatever the results may be – could we open ourselves further still in curious and loving observation? Might our interspecies “brothers” and “sisters” simultaneously be gifting us with opportunities to glean additional understanding of, and insights into, the nature of life?

    And is there some form of help that we could offer in reverence? They say they do not desire help in the way that we tend to think of it. However, they reiterate their encouragement for us to make peace with change. They look forward to the time when humans foster the acceptance that nothing stays the same – and is not meant to. This is what they would consider to be of immense help. Its impact would be energetic, which we habitually undervalue. But in like fashion, when our focus is upon fear or belief in wrongness, the aberrant energies disseminate outwardly. Our thoughts do not remain contained within us. Our influence can be surprisingly far-reaching. So, the shared benefits of championing the integrity and oneness of the Universe are immeasurable. We are tremendously empowered in ways we have yet to realize or bring to conscious fruition.

    As with all individuals of all species, branches of science are constantly evolving. Ecology, not to detract from its very valid academic and scientific core, is also rooted in a keen caring about life forms. Leading-edge questions, such as yours, will likely provide the impetus for further advancement of the field. What could be more exciting than resonance and alignment in co-creation?!

    Barbara Ellis