Scapegoat: What the Invasive Species Story Gets Wrong

by Clare Follmann

The problem with invasive species is a problem of capitalism.

A caste of plants and animals, labeled "invasive species," are charged with being a key cause of habitat degradation that must be eradicated at any cost—an ethically questionable and often futile approach. While some invasive species cause great environmental damage, recent developments in the study of ecology have found that intervention efforts themselves have frequently proved more harmful than helpful to their local ecosystems. Yet the outdated narrative of “species management” persists in both public belief and conservation policy, distracting from and even justifying a far greater threat to biodiversity: the global capitalist system that is destroying our planet.

Drawing on environmental science and semiotics, Scapegoat recounts how the use of biased rhetoric and inaccessible language has created support for a popular but misleading war of “native” against “invasive” that does nothing to address the root cause of biodiversity loss. Instead, these are "plastic words" that lose their precise scientific origins with their introduction to everyday language yet still carry the weight of authority—becoming persuasive and dangerously malleable. In her surprising and clear-eyed polemic, Clare Follmann challenges the received wisdom on invasive species in light of the true ecological crisis we face. This book poses moral and political questions to make us rethink our relationship with nature (and each other) in a rapidly changing world.

Genres: Ecology, Nonfiction, Science, Animals, Nature

224 pages, Paperback

Published March 3, 2026

About the author

Clare, M.E.S., is an author and environmentalist located in Olympia, Washington. Her writing engages with themes of landscape, ecology, climate crisis, language, and philosophy. She likes to poke holes in dominant or obsolete narratives, and strives to both listen to and help uplift the voices and stories that have been too often cast aside.

Her work focuses on finding and planting the literal and figurative seeds that will help support a post-capitalist society that prioritizes the well-being of people and planet.

Reviews

[Corvus · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was excited to see Clare Follmann's Scapegoat: What the Invasive Species Story Gets Wrong show up in AK Press' catalogue. I am a birder involved in a various naturalist projects and social circles and the lack of overlap between those and proper leftist critique of harmful systems is quite frustrating at times. I was especially looking forward to discussion of the idea of "invasive" species as it relates to capitalism and other harmful authoritarian systems.

I do think this book suffers from a flawed representation. I think that it would have been better if it was represented as an essay collection by the author. A better byline would be something like, "essays on semiotics, nature, and capitalism." Much of the book is not about introduced species. The content that is about this topic is absolutely fantastic, but it is not what most of the book is about. Occasionally there is mention of the central topic in these other essays but it feels tacked on.

The introduction is gripping and heart wrenching. No matter how many times I hear about "judas" animals- those isolated and exploited in order to repeatedly draw humans to their kin so that they can be slaughtered in front of them- it breaks my heart. It is an appropriate choice of example for discussion of how serious this issue is. Often times in ecology, wildlife "management," and other circles, species are seen as these abstract categories, rather than groups of individuals who each have their own thoughts, feelings, desires, and experiences. Every time we forget about that it allows for more cruelty to take place, even done so on a mission to do good for other species.

After the intriguing introduction, there is a long, academic section on language usage that immediately feels like a different book. The inaccessibility of science writing is important (though odd to convey using academic writing.) It all felt very general however as if it was not written with the central topic in mind. There are also areas where I felt it veered a little bit into conspiracist rhetoric, including a section that suggested that scientists taking pharmaceutical grants don't write their own papers. I would not be surprised if the essays in this book were all written at different times and combined here which is why I think it should have been billed more as an essay collection.

When we get to invasive species language again, there is important discussion of how the language of war is used in order to discuss these animals who never asked to be brought here in the first place. Not only is it inaccurate and harmful to discuss them as Invaders that must be defeated, it contributes to a wider culture of relating to other animals and nature as a whole as enemies. On top of that, the idea of what is native has always been evolving. Increasingly human caused climate collapse forces species into other areas just to survive. Calling any creature who has either been brought in by humans or forced into an area by them "invasive" is inaccurate and insulting. Strangely enough by the poorly defined construct, humans are the most "invasive" species in pretty much every location on Earth aside from parts of Africa. Yet, (with the exception of anti-immigration racists and the like,) the same people calling other species invasive would find it absurd categorize all humans this way and even more absurd to wholesale slaughter them as a result. I feel that the author did well to convey this. Follmann also does well to articulate how invasive species rhetoric is used to defend other forms of oppression and ecological exploitation. Other species are easy scapegoats so that humans can avoid tackling their own species' responsibility for ecological destruction.

The central essay of the book, which I assume was written previously and chosen to be expanded into a book, is phenomenal. It is one of the best assessments of the many questions involving introduced species that I have read. The amount of research that has gone into it is impressive and left me with a long list of sources to read later. There is a focused section about barred and spotted owls that actually brought me to tears. It was already upsetting knowing how barred owls we're being slaughtered across the country due to their movement into other locations (due to human caused habitat loss among other things.) However, I did not know just how much logging was responsible for spotted owl decline. I also didn't know just how many spotted owls loggers are allowed to kill. It is yet another devastating story about how the language of war has created an enemy out of an animal who has been pushed into an impossible situation for survival due to our own capitalist exploitation of the natural world.

Follmann suggests that one important way of reframing the issue is to move away from the subject object binary- meaning viewing introduced species as an isolated entity acting upon an ecosystem. She instead encourages a relational perspective involving a more complex understanding of how interrelated facets of ecosystems are as well as how they are constantly shifting in ways that cannot be controlled. The author offers examples of this way of thinking drawing from a variety of sources.

Moving forward to other essays takes us again into what feels like a separate book. There is a long section on how capitalism will not save us from environmental catastrophe. You will get no disagreement from me there. If this book was billed as a wider discussion on this topic I would be fine with it. However, the issue of species migration, consensual or otherwise, has been taking place since humans first set foot outside Africa. We have been altering the ecosystem, causing extinctions, and so forth since long before capitalism was a thing. The idea was to create a bigger picture look at the problem, which I appreciate. However, for me, this ended up feeling reductive in terms of the central topic. It reminded me a little bit of how many discussions of oppression toward other species are shut down by people claiming that dismantling capitalism will solve the problem or must come first before anyone else is considered. Much like pretty much every other oppression, things have been taking place before capitalism and will take place after in full force if not tackled.

Furthermore, and this is something that is unfortunate for wider audiences, I worry that anyone involved more intimately or hands on in dealing with these devastating ecosystem problems regarding introduced species will be frustrated by where this book goes. The author suggests looking to movements such as Standing Rock for guidance, but almost every example given is of an acute form of resistance to an immediate encroachment from a corporation or other capitalist and exploitative entity. I do not believe that looking at these movements will tell us how to address ongoing issues on isolated island ecosystems where humans have introduced species and caused extinctions and other havoc.

I do think that anyone can benefit from the perspective of looking at the bigger picture of all of this. In fact I think that is critical if we are ever going to move forward in ways that will actually be successful and not simply and endless circle of slaughter. What I'm saying is that I was hoping for solutions that were a bit more specific. I don't expect the author to have on the ground species management recommendation as I know that is not her field of expertise. I did expect there to be a more focused ending to this book than there was though. I was hoping that it would bridge the divides between various communities, scientific fields, and schools of thought. I think that the central essays on the idea of species as Invaders are very good for that. The book as a whole though I think could turn folks outside of leftist communities off as far as solutions go.

Even though I have these criticisms, they pretty much stem from the way the book is summarized and blurbed. If the book had been billed as a wider discussion about biosemiotics, species relations, and capitalism, these criticisms would not have been at the forefront of my mind. So, my recommendation is to go into this book thinking of a bigger picture than questions focused on the idea of invasive species. I think that approaching the book in this way will make for a more enriching and informative reading experience. I definitely can see myself recommending this book to others with that caveat in mind.

I am really grateful that the author and AK press put out this book. I hope that it results in more discussion of authoritarianism and capitalism in science, naturalist, and ecology circles. I hope that it results in more consideration of the natural world and other species in leftist circles. Keep your dogs on a leash, cats inside, and stop ignoring animal agriculture/fishing if you care about climate change.

This was also posted to my storygraph and blog.

[Manybooks · Rating 5 out of 5]

In Scapegoat: What the Invasive Species Story Gets Wrong (2026) environmentalist Clare Follmann convincingly (and for me also delightfully as well as totally believably and forcefully so) points out that globally speaking, most official definitions of so-called invasive species always or at least far far too often tend to prioritise economic interests over actual biology, ecology and environmental concerns, thus turning non endemic plants and animals into a convenient and proverbial fall guy for corporate greed, deemed as necessary politics-wise habitat destruction, and that we should, that humanity must cease viewing non native, non endemic species only through the lens (and also without the language) of militarised warfare, without a totally strict us versus them mentality and that instead we must dismantle or at least hugely change the global capitalist (industrial) systems which are according to Follmann (and indeed also according to me personally, as I massively am in general agreement here) driving and totally fuelling ecological destruction (basically global disaster).

Therefore, rather than strictly focusing on the all-encompassing and fanatical eradication of non-native plants and animals (which is basically kill, kill, kill) Clare Follmann gloriously and wonderfully textually advocates in Scapegoat: What the Invasive Species Story Gets Wrong for a radical shift regarding how we approach conservation, that we need stop totally (and often even solely) blaming and vilifying individual so-called floral and faunal invaders (and which did not deliberately and with purpose move from one area to another area to wreak havoc anyhow, except perhaps humans, as let us face it, we kind of are the ultimate invasive species) and to examine how global trade, resource extraction and corporate interests tend to disrupt habitats considerably more than most invasive species do, that we need to address how many industrial and agricultural practices majorly, lastingly and sometimes even irrevocably weaken and decimate ecosystems (and that disrupted ecosystems are also what allows introduced species to rapidly spread), and indeed, how many governments, industries and even university trained biologists, conservationists etc. often tend to use invasive species as scapegoats to avoid addressing climate collapse or to avoid passing stricter agricultural, industrial, residential regulations (and hence the book title of Scapegoat: What the Invasive Species Story Gets Wrong being what it is).

And yes, yes, yes, I as someone interested in environmental protection, climate change, pollution, carbon footprints (both locally and globally) as well as as someone with an academic interest in language and semiotics, I indeed do totally and completely agree with Clare Follmann pointing out in and in fact throughout Scapegoat: What the Invasive Species Story Gets Wrong how we ALL need to remove armed conflict (war) metaphors from environmental and ecological vocabulary, that we must totally, absolutely eliminate violent, xenophobic and nationalistic sounding rhetoric and images (like describing and depicting non endemic plants and animals as invading enemies that must be be exterminated, that must be routinely and en masse killed, slaughtered, that we equally so need to be hugely skeptical of all those currently popular but intensely vague buzzwords like sustainability and also health and welfare when they are used by extractive industries, logging companies, mass agriculture to justify mass killings or chemical pesticide use (such as for example the vile mass extermination of barred owls to supposedly protect endangered spotted owls in the Pacific Northwest when the species imbalance was caused by too much clear-cutting anyhow or spraying pesticides everywhere to get rid of proliferating non native plants).

So basically (and of course this is something rather controversial and probably also something anathema to our fast-paced modern world, where everything is and seems go, go, go), Vollmann basically is with Scapegoat: What the Invasive Species Story Gets Wrong telling her readers (and not just her readers, but indeed all humanity) to slow down and that we need to approach conservation with care, empathy and importantly so with careful observation rather than with immediate and often violent eradication ideas and programs, that we need to meticulously study and also understand ecosystem relationships and to also look at and scientifically analyse how non-native species (both plants and animals) are interacting with local, with endemic wildlife before intervening. For yes, some and indeed probably even many introduced species do successfully adapt to fill vital ecological niches in changing climates, in their new ecosystems, and that plants and animals have in fact been moving into different ecosystems, into different areas of the world for hundreds of millions of years , with Clare Follmann demonstrating with especially the final part of Scapegoat: What the Invasive Species Story Gets Wrong that embracing long-term, continuous land stewardship modelled after Indigenous practices as well as not automatically considering each and every non endemic animal or plant as some horrid and disgusting migrating invader needing to be exterminated and eradicated is thus and definitely much better for global ecosystems rather than relying on short-term and vilely, disgustingly trigger-happy eradication campaigns. And no, Follmann with Scapegoat: What the Invasive Species Story Gets Wrong also does not in any way deny that introduced species can and do alter environments, but she textually focuses instead on shifting from defensive violence toward community care, to structural accountability and with Scapegoat: What the Invasive Species Story Gets Wrong therefore presenting (and for me also universally and totally proving) that we cannot solve global biodiversity loss using the same capitalist systems and their inherent violence and need for instant gratification that have created this issue in the first place.

Five solid stars for Scapegoat: What the Invasive Species Story Gets Wrong (and even though I do wish that Clare Follmann would include an index, a glossary and also have both endnotes and a separate bibliography, considering how important Follmann’s message is, how convincingly she has argued and shown her thesis statement and that I am after reading Scapegoat: What the Invasive Species Story Gets Wrong totally and utterly on her side so to speak, no, this time, I will not lower my rating to four stars and will also very highly recommend Scapegoat: What the Invasive Species Story Gets Wrong).

[Luna M · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book seemed to be about the way that discourse around invasive species has been weaponized to distract from the true culprit behind global environmental degradation: capitalism. I think there was promise in that book, but I’m not sure that’s exactly what I read. Almost a third of this book was devoted to a philosophical discussion of linguistics, with appearances from everyone from Foucault to Arendt to Sontag to Wittgenstein. Other parts read as the script for a Sunrise Movement rally— I agree with the substance, but I’m confused when it’s peppered throughout chapters about the biology of species interactions. And some of the science wasn’t entirely accurate— I read this right after coming back from a convening where Tribal Nations from across the country shared lessons from the very stewardship practices heralded in this book as one of the central solutions to the climate crisis, yet many of the takeaways from people on the ground directly contradicted both the data and the conclusions in the book. Still a worthy project, but needs some editing.

[Max Mills · Rating 4 out of 5]

I liked this, i must have i made notes or underlines on nearly every page, although i skimmed some sections. However, i dont think the content generally was that new to me.
I felt like this was very accessible, starting with a story, then explaining the theory from the very foundations, then bringing in social movements to propose new worlds.

[martyn benny · Rating 5 out of 5]

Scapegoat: What the Invasive Species Story Gets Wrong is a bold, intellectually provocative, and deeply thought-provoking work that challenges one of the most widely accepted narratives in modern conservation. Clare Follmann asks readers to reconsider assumptions that often go unquestioned, encouraging a more nuanced understanding of ecology, environmental policy, and the language we use to describe the natural world.

Rather than denying that invasive species can cause ecological harm, the book carefully examines how the concept has evolved in public discourse and policy. Follmann demonstrates that ecological systems are often far more complex than simple "native versus invasive" narratives suggest, inviting readers to think critically about whether some management strategies truly address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss.

One of the book's greatest strengths is its interdisciplinary approach. By combining ecology, environmental science, philosophy, and semiotics, Follmann explores not only ecological questions but also how language shapes public understanding and political decision-making. Her discussion of how scientific terminology can change meaning once it enters everyday conversation is particularly insightful, revealing the power words have in framing environmental debates.

The writing is both accessible and intellectually engaging. Complex ecological concepts are explained clearly without oversimplifying them, making the book equally rewarding for readers with scientific backgrounds and those simply interested in environmental issues. Throughout, Follmann encourages curiosity rather than certainty, asking readers to evaluate evidence and question inherited assumptions.

What makes Scapegoat especially compelling is its willingness to broaden the conversation beyond individual species and examine the larger social, economic, and political forces influencing ecosystems worldwide. Whether readers ultimately agree with every conclusion or not, the book succeeds in stimulating meaningful discussion about conservation priorities, environmental ethics, and the challenges of protecting biodiversity in a rapidly changing world.

Well researched, eloquently argued, and refreshingly original, Scapegoat is an important contribution to contemporary environmental literature. It is essential reading for anyone interested in ecology, conservation, environmental policy, or the evolving relationship between humans and the natural world.

[Artymesia · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a generally well written and interesting collection of thoughts on science, capitalism and colonialism. The title is moderately misleading, as Invasive Species are not necessarily discussed as much as the title would lead one to believe. The first third of the book is more focused on language and semiotics. The final third is more focused on the failure of green capitalism and a need for alternative solutions. The middle third was more focused on non-native species, but mixed up with some other ideas. It was interesting, but I often felt that I wished I were reading one of the other books she quoted.

Those who are more interested more specifically in the science of alien/introduced species do have several leads in her notes to look for more information, but I think Fred Pearce's The New Wild covers much of the same ground as this book in significantly greater detail and in a more engaging way. He goes into very fine toothed detail on the inherent biases of scientific writing, the fallacies of oft quoted "statistics" about invasive species, and the ways that we've gotten it wrong.