Nutria have been threatening watersheds for YEARS. I wrote a paper about it like five years ago. The Southern US has had issues with them for a long time. I'm surprised it took this long for them...
Nutria have been threatening watersheds for YEARS. I wrote a paper about it like five years ago. The Southern US has had issues with them for a long time. I'm surprised it took this long for them to become a publicized issue in California.
There have been dog treats made from nutria meat on the market for some time. I haven't purchased any myself, but I imagine that would be one way to support making an industry of reducing their population...
Edit: maybe I'll grab my paper tomorrow and post it if I can find it...
Any industry who's goal is to fix some problem will have a vested interest in making sure the problem never goes away. A ton of excellent examples in this Wikipedia entry.
making an industry of reducing their population
Any industry who's goal is to fix some problem will have a vested interest in making sure the problem never goes away. A ton of excellent examples in this Wikipedia entry.
Commercial fishing must be forced by laws and various contracts (which are seldom enforced) to not fish native species of fish to extinction. What makes you think rodent trappers would somehow...
Commercial fishing must be forced by laws and various contracts (which are seldom enforced) to not fish native species of fish to extinction. What makes you think rodent trappers would somehow successfully restrain themselves without any of that working against them? If they wanted to breed and grow protein sources in captivity, I don’t know why they’d pick something illegal when they could just do chickens or rabbits or something instead. I don’t think it pays as a delicacy or anything.
Ah yes, tails. Surefire proof that an animal is dead, for when have you ever heard of a rat living for more than a few hours without their very vital tail? Putting out bounties does tend to...
Ah yes, tails. Surefire proof that an animal is dead, for when have you ever heard of a rat living for more than a few hours without their very vital tail?
Putting out bounties does tend to backfire a bit. Given this is America, it would be more effective to just remove any hunting restrictions on nutria. Main concern really is just people accidentally hunting beavers and otters due to being careless or using "I thought it was a nutria" as a defense.
Huh... I think I just realized what they're doing. Removing all hunting restrictions would bring out more careless hunters who just want an excuse to hunt animals and "vermin". So I think they're just trying to nudge people to very specifically hunt nutria for meals, since those hunters would be more careful to make sure they specifically catch nutria.
According to the California department of fish and wildlife (CDFW), nutria were originally introduced to the US for the fur trade but have since established themselves in as many as 18 states. The rodents can grow up to 40in (102cm), which is nearly as large as a beaver or a small dog.
They were believed to have been eradicated from California in the 1970s, but a spike was detected in 2017, especially in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River delta and surrounding wetlands.
Federal wildlife officials are trying to make the consumption of nutria somewhat enticing by drawing similarities to the taste of rabbit or dark turkey meat. Resources, including recipes for nutria dishes such as stews and chilli, are available on Nutria.com.
Nutria are highly destructive to marsh environments. The rodents eat up to a quarter of their body weight in vegetation daily. Their feeding habits not only destroy native plant life but also destabilize soil structures, which can result in heavy erosion and habitat loss for threatened and endangered species.
This article is weirdly written as if they either forget to mention California up top or forget not to reference a single state later. It's weird. And how are people supposed to eat it without...
This article is weirdly written as if they either forget to mention California up top or forget not to reference a single state later. It's weird.
And how are people supposed to eat it without hunting it? Or was it just a marketing campaign for invasive species awareness. Bad article from the Guardian IMO
I agree it's weird. I've been aware of nutria for a while. I thought that hunting or trapping them was encouraged. Maybe the realization, by fish and wildlife staff, that people will misidentify...
I agree it's weird.
I've been aware of nutria for a while. I thought that hunting or trapping them was encouraged. Maybe the realization, by fish and wildlife staff, that people will misidentify beaver or otters is newer than my understanding.
That's what it says for why they don't want nutria hunted, but the Guardian didn't edit the paragraph that said "other animals they recommend hunting and eating" or something along those lines....
That's what it says for why they don't want nutria hunted, but the Guardian didn't edit the paragraph that said "other animals they recommend hunting and eating" or something along those lines.
I'm now wondering if nutria are fish for Lenten purposes ala beavers and capybara...
ETA: Beavers, Capybara and Muskrats -yes, Nutria - uncertain
I just think this is a remarkably poorly written article on the topic.
Article is badly written, but I think I just realized what the CDFW is going for. Removing all hunting restrictions would bring out more careless hunters who just want an excuse to hunt animals...
Article is badly written, but I think I just realized what the CDFW is going for. Removing all hunting restrictions would bring out more careless hunters who just want an excuse to hunt animals and "vermin". Equal chances they'd be trigger happy and shoot anything vaguely resembling a nutria, or use it as an excuse/defense to "accidentally" shoot some other species they've wanted to catch for a while. And trying to assign a bounty historically doesn't work too well since people have previously just started breeding the animals for the bounty.
So instead, I think they're just trying to nudge people to very specifically hunt or trap nutria for meals, since they'd be more careful to make sure they get nutria. And since it seems most of the nutria are on private property, the people living there can set up traps pretty easily if they decide they like the taste of nutria.
The thought popped into my head when I saw the CDFW reached out to make a correction about them not encouraging hunting. Feels a bit like... Not quite damage control, but trying to keep some form of control over the situation. Seems like they're trying to prevent overzealous hunters from jumping on an easy excuse to shoot whatever they want, and try to limit it to more conscientious hunters.
Yeah I think you're right, as I said elsewhere, Sasquatch hunting is banned in a county in one state to avoid humans getting shot, so encouraging extreme care is ideal, especially for people that...
Yeah I think you're right, as I said elsewhere, Sasquatch hunting is banned in a county in one state to avoid humans getting shot, so encouraging extreme care is ideal, especially for people that don't know what these animals look like compared to other similar species.
Definitely don't call it a rodent if you want people to eat it and they're fur is worth something, so promote that too. Could make nutra fur the new thing rich people buy to pretend they're doing...
Definitely don't call it a rodent if you want people to eat it and they're fur is worth something, so promote that too. Could make nutra fur the new thing rich people buy to pretend they're doing something positive.
Also what kind of idiot mistakes them for beaver or otter, one is long and the other has a giant tail, Seems like a lie by a poacher.<_<
I imagine the concern is a mixture of people shooting from a distance and not being able to tell for sure... Or using "I thought it was a nutria" as an excuse for deliberately shooting other animals.
I imagine the concern is a mixture of people shooting from a distance and not being able to tell for sure... Or using "I thought it was a nutria" as an excuse for deliberately shooting other animals.
So nutria pâté (pâté de ragondin) is a thing in France, though not something you'll see sold in regular supermarkets. There are even a bunch of recipes online. The taste is apparently somewhere in...
So nutria pâté (pâté de ragondin) is a thing in France, though not something you'll see sold in regular supermarkets. There are even a bunchofrecipes online. The taste is apparently somewhere in between rabbit and hare. I've only ever had rabbit and find it a bit meh (like pretty much all game meat) but if you enjoy either of those this might be up your alley!
I like some game meat, but rabbits, apart from having a distinct taste that's imo less pleasant than boars, deer and other large animals, are weirdly dry. They're a traditional source of meat...
I like some game meat, but rabbits, apart from having a distinct taste that's imo less pleasant than boars, deer and other large animals, are weirdly dry. They're a traditional source of meat where I'm from because they're so easy and cheap to breed almost every rural home used to have a few for meat, but their consumption reduced dramatically once we stopped being poor, so if nutria meat tastes similar, it's unlikely to become a hit.
Yeah rabbit is relatively common in France, and a few other European countries I've been to or lived, but I never got the appeal. Stick it in a sausage however and I'm game (heh). Love me some...
Yeah rabbit is relatively common in France, and a few other European countries I've been to or lived, but I never got the appeal. Stick it in a sausage however and I'm game (heh). Love me some boar sausages as well. I think if it's mixed up in a pâté or a sausage with some spices, extra fat, and some other meats (like pork) it might be more enjoyable? Though if it hasn't taken off here (and they sure do love their game meat in France), I also don't expect it to be popular elsewhere.
You made me google rabbit sausages and they're uncommon and kind of expensive, but one that's mixed rabbit/pork is available near me. Seems like lunch for thursday is sorted. Oh, and I found a...
You made me google rabbit sausages and they're uncommon and kind of expensive, but one that's mixed rabbit/pork is available near me. Seems like lunch for thursday is sorted. Oh, and I found a recipe for nutria sausages, but not actual sausages for sale here.
Speaking of mildly controversial sausage meats, horse sausages are great as well.
Oooh I hope you like them! I've heard good things about horse meat but only ever had dried before. There used to be a few horse meat butchers in Paris but there's only one left now (the horse meat...
Oooh I hope you like them!
I've heard good things about horse meat but only ever had dried before. There used to be a few horse meat butchers in Paris but there's only one left now (the horse meat scandal during the 2010s probably contributed). If I ever swing by that area I'll see if I can get some sausages and give them a try!
On the off chance you are serious, cats are obligate carnivores. Eating an herbivore or omnivore is very different. Dog and bear can be eaten (😥, Cats won't taste good at all.
On the off chance you are serious, cats are obligate carnivores.
Eating an herbivore or omnivore is very different. Dog and bear can be eaten (😥,
I was mostly making a joke about the hypocrisy of people being OK with this but not doing the same for cats who are arguably more destructive. But, I'm curious, what makes an obligate carnivore...
I was mostly making a joke about the hypocrisy of people being OK with this but not doing the same for cats who are arguably more destructive.
But, I'm curious, what makes an obligate carnivore not good to eat besides biomagnification? I know people eat alligators.
There are a few factors, though none are particularly dispositive and they tend to impact carnivores in general, not exclusively obligate carnivores. Biomagnification/bioaccumulation, which you've...
There are a few factors, though none are particularly dispositive and they tend to impact carnivores in general, not exclusively obligate carnivores.
Biomagnification/bioaccumulation, which you've mentioned, is one. Apex predators in particular have higher rates of parasites. For instance, bear meat is pretty famously full of parasites and it's frequently the source of outbreaks of trichinellosis and other parasitic infections in parts of the US. While parasites can often be dealt with through thoroughly cooking the meat, other toxins that bioaccumulate may not be as easy to deal with.
Another issue is the taste and texture of the meat. This is probably a bigger factor in practice than bioaccumulation, imo. An animal's diet can have a strong effect on the taste of said animal's meat, and that effect can be negative when that animal is fed a diet of meat. Reportedly bear meat tastes better when the bear has been feeding on berries than when it's been eating fish, for example. This taste factor may be the one that hits specifically obligate carnivores the strongest, since it can't be mitigated through diet in the same way. Carnivores also tend to be pretty lean and muscular, carrying much less fat than herbivores, which means the meat tends to be tough and stringy. The carnivores that are more frequently eaten tend to have some features that make them exceptions on one or both of these fronts -- carnivorous fish are very commonly eaten, for instance, but they accumulate fat in their muscles very differently from land-dwelling predators.
Another factor in why we tend not to eat the meat of carnivores, however, is probably practical. Carnivores are difficult and inefficient to farm because they're higher on the food chain -- if you feed 1000 calories of beef to a tiger, only about 10% of those calories go into the tiger's biomass, so you're going to need to raise an order of magnitude more cattle for the same amount of calories as tiger meat. Even considering the world prior to agriculture, the risk involved in hunting carnivorous predators is very different from that of hunting herbivores, as carnivores tend to be more dangerous and herbivores more numerous in the wild. These historical practicalities have no doubt influenced human cultural preferences and taboos around eating certain animals as well.
People also eat and enjoy snakes in some cultures. Reptiles taste different than mammalian carnivores. I'm embarrassed. I honestly thought I was citing a proven fact but the truth is that it's an...
People also eat and enjoy snakes in some cultures. Reptiles taste different than mammalian carnivores.
I'm embarrassed. I honestly thought I was citing a proven fact but the truth is that it's an idea that I picked up from people who hunt, both from books and from people talking about the taste of different kinds of meat. The source for my original comment is 'it is known'.
Here is a related article. I'm going to look for more.
Nutria have been threatening watersheds for YEARS. I wrote a paper about it like five years ago. The Southern US has had issues with them for a long time. I'm surprised it took this long for them to become a publicized issue in California.
There have been dog treats made from nutria meat on the market for some time. I haven't purchased any myself, but I imagine that would be one way to support making an industry of reducing their population...
Edit: maybe I'll grab my paper tomorrow and post it if I can find it...
Any industry who's goal is to fix some problem will have a vested interest in making sure the problem never goes away. A ton of excellent examples in this Wikipedia entry.
Commercial fishing must be forced by laws and various contracts (which are seldom enforced) to not fish native species of fish to extinction. What makes you think rodent trappers would somehow successfully restrain themselves without any of that working against them? If they wanted to breed and grow protein sources in captivity, I don’t know why they’d pick something illegal when they could just do chickens or rabbits or something instead. I don’t think it pays as a delicacy or anything.
The article includes three explicit examples of governments trying to incentivize killing pests, and one of them does in fact concern rodents.
Yeah that case doesn’t involve eating the rats, it was a bounty on tails.
Ah yes, tails. Surefire proof that an animal is dead, for when have you ever heard of a rat living for more than a few hours without their very vital tail?
Putting out bounties does tend to backfire a bit. Given this is America, it would be more effective to just remove any hunting restrictions on nutria. Main concern really is just people accidentally hunting beavers and otters due to being careless or using "I thought it was a nutria" as a defense.
Huh... I think I just realized what they're doing. Removing all hunting restrictions would bring out more careless hunters who just want an excuse to hunt animals and "vermin". So I think they're just trying to nudge people to very specifically hunt nutria for meals, since those hunters would be more careful to make sure they specifically catch nutria.
From the article:
This article is weirdly written as if they either forget to mention California up top or forget not to reference a single state later. It's weird.
And how are people supposed to eat it without hunting it? Or was it just a marketing campaign for invasive species awareness. Bad article from the Guardian IMO
I agree it's weird.
I've been aware of nutria for a while. I thought that hunting or trapping them was encouraged. Maybe the realization, by fish and wildlife staff, that people will misidentify beaver or otters is newer than my understanding.
But nutria are a menace.
That's what it says for why they don't want nutria hunted, but the Guardian didn't edit the paragraph that said "other animals they recommend hunting and eating" or something along those lines.
I'm now wondering if nutria are fish for Lenten purposes ala beavers and capybara...
ETA: Beavers, Capybara and Muskrats -yes, Nutria - uncertain
I just think this is a remarkably poorly written article on the topic.
Article is badly written, but I think I just realized what the CDFW is going for. Removing all hunting restrictions would bring out more careless hunters who just want an excuse to hunt animals and "vermin". Equal chances they'd be trigger happy and shoot anything vaguely resembling a nutria, or use it as an excuse/defense to "accidentally" shoot some other species they've wanted to catch for a while. And trying to assign a bounty historically doesn't work too well since people have previously just started breeding the animals for the bounty.
So instead, I think they're just trying to nudge people to very specifically hunt or trap nutria for meals, since they'd be more careful to make sure they get nutria. And since it seems most of the nutria are on private property, the people living there can set up traps pretty easily if they decide they like the taste of nutria.
The thought popped into my head when I saw the CDFW reached out to make a correction about them not encouraging hunting. Feels a bit like... Not quite damage control, but trying to keep some form of control over the situation. Seems like they're trying to prevent overzealous hunters from jumping on an easy excuse to shoot whatever they want, and try to limit it to more conscientious hunters.
Yeah I think you're right, as I said elsewhere, Sasquatch hunting is banned in a county in one state to avoid humans getting shot, so encouraging extreme care is ideal, especially for people that don't know what these animals look like compared to other similar species.
It's fairly easy to trap them, which should also allow for sorting out other animals.
It wasn't clear to me that the Dept wants that either. But hence me saying the article was disappointing
Definitely don't call it a rodent if you want people to eat it and they're fur is worth something, so promote that too. Could make nutra fur the new thing rich people buy to pretend they're doing something positive.
Also what kind of idiot mistakes them for beaver or otter, one is long and the other has a giant tail, Seems like a lie by a poacher.<_<
We are talking about a country where at least one county has made Sasquatch a protected "no hunting allowed" species so that humans don't get shot...
I imagine the concern is a mixture of people shooting from a distance and not being able to tell for sure... Or using "I thought it was a nutria" as an excuse for deliberately shooting other animals.
So nutria pâté (pâté de ragondin) is a thing in France, though not something you'll see sold in regular supermarkets. There are even a bunch of recipes online. The taste is apparently somewhere in between rabbit and hare. I've only ever had rabbit and find it a bit meh (like pretty much all game meat) but if you enjoy either of those this might be up your alley!
I like some game meat, but rabbits, apart from having a distinct taste that's imo less pleasant than boars, deer and other large animals, are weirdly dry. They're a traditional source of meat where I'm from because they're so easy and cheap to breed almost every rural home used to have a few for meat, but their consumption reduced dramatically once we stopped being poor, so if nutria meat tastes similar, it's unlikely to become a hit.
Yeah rabbit is relatively common in France, and a few other European countries I've been to or lived, but I never got the appeal. Stick it in a sausage however and I'm game (heh). Love me some boar sausages as well. I think if it's mixed up in a pâté or a sausage with some spices, extra fat, and some other meats (like pork) it might be more enjoyable? Though if it hasn't taken off here (and they sure do love their game meat in France), I also don't expect it to be popular elsewhere.
You made me google rabbit sausages and they're uncommon and kind of expensive, but one that's mixed rabbit/pork is available near me. Seems like lunch for thursday is sorted. Oh, and I found a recipe for nutria sausages, but not actual sausages for sale here.
Speaking of mildly controversial sausage meats, horse sausages are great as well.
Oooh I hope you like them!
I've heard good things about horse meat but only ever had dried before. There used to be a few horse meat butchers in Paris but there's only one left now (the horse meat scandal during the 2010s probably contributed). If I ever swing by that area I'll see if I can get some sausages and give them a try!
Mmm fresh nutria rotisserie with extra orange teeth. On a kudzu salad and a murder hornet trail mix
Should do the same for cats if this is considered a good solution for an invasive species.
On the off chance you are serious, cats are obligate carnivores.
Eating an herbivore or omnivore is very different. Dog and bear can be eaten (😥,
Cats won't taste good at all.
I was mostly making a joke about the hypocrisy of people being OK with this but not doing the same for cats who are arguably more destructive.
But, I'm curious, what makes an obligate carnivore not good to eat besides biomagnification? I know people eat alligators.
There are a few factors, though none are particularly dispositive and they tend to impact carnivores in general, not exclusively obligate carnivores.
Biomagnification/bioaccumulation, which you've mentioned, is one. Apex predators in particular have higher rates of parasites. For instance, bear meat is pretty famously full of parasites and it's frequently the source of outbreaks of trichinellosis and other parasitic infections in parts of the US. While parasites can often be dealt with through thoroughly cooking the meat, other toxins that bioaccumulate may not be as easy to deal with.
Another issue is the taste and texture of the meat. This is probably a bigger factor in practice than bioaccumulation, imo. An animal's diet can have a strong effect on the taste of said animal's meat, and that effect can be negative when that animal is fed a diet of meat. Reportedly bear meat tastes better when the bear has been feeding on berries than when it's been eating fish, for example. This taste factor may be the one that hits specifically obligate carnivores the strongest, since it can't be mitigated through diet in the same way. Carnivores also tend to be pretty lean and muscular, carrying much less fat than herbivores, which means the meat tends to be tough and stringy. The carnivores that are more frequently eaten tend to have some features that make them exceptions on one or both of these fronts -- carnivorous fish are very commonly eaten, for instance, but they accumulate fat in their muscles very differently from land-dwelling predators.
Another factor in why we tend not to eat the meat of carnivores, however, is probably practical. Carnivores are difficult and inefficient to farm because they're higher on the food chain -- if you feed 1000 calories of beef to a tiger, only about 10% of those calories go into the tiger's biomass, so you're going to need to raise an order of magnitude more cattle for the same amount of calories as tiger meat. Even considering the world prior to agriculture, the risk involved in hunting carnivorous predators is very different from that of hunting herbivores, as carnivores tend to be more dangerous and herbivores more numerous in the wild. These historical practicalities have no doubt influenced human cultural preferences and taboos around eating certain animals as well.
People also eat and enjoy snakes in some cultures. Reptiles taste different than mammalian carnivores.
I'm embarrassed. I honestly thought I was citing a proven fact but the truth is that it's an idea that I picked up from people who hunt, both from books and from people talking about the taste of different kinds of meat. The source for my original comment is 'it is known'.
Here is a related article. I'm going to look for more.