[noahA]

I agree with the direction of your idea but I don’t think it applies here. Invasive species are a major cause of loss of biodiversity. Typically, habitats change over a much larger timescale. If you introduce a species that’s suited for a habitat and it has no natural predators, you’re going to end up losing a lot of biodiversity as a result. Why is biodiversity important? Biodiversity gives us new opportunities for research (lots of new medical discoveries come from biodiversity), it allows an ecosystem to adapt to pressure (imagine if there’s a deadly new avian flu and you have 10 vs 100 bird species in an area, it’s a lot less likely that all birds will be wiped out in the second scenario as there’s more varied adaptations in that system that might allow the birds to survive). Change is of course natural for all ecosystems but as you lose biodiversity from things like invasive species, you lose the factors that allow an ecosystem to surmount potential extinction (extirpation?) events.

[dondawest]

If you apply this same logic to humans, don’t you wind up with a xenophobic perspective? This seems like an alt-right manifesto but applied to animals not humans.

[ecocentrik]

If you don't see the difference between animal control and xenophobic practices of population control, please seek psychological help.