Nutria (NUTRIA Case)

     CASE NUMBER:   288
     CASE MNEMONIC: NUTRIA
     CASE NAME:     Nutrias in the US and Trade





About TED Categories and Clusters




A.   IDENTIFICATION

1.   The Issue

     The North American Nutria was brought to the US by 
businessmen who felt that nutria fur would be in great demand in
the future. However, the demand for the pelts of Nutria never came
to fruition, and consequently, the nutria were then freed into the
wild by their prospective ranchers. Once in the wild, their rapid
reproduction rates caused the Nutria population to increase at a
very high rate, and they eventually overran the southern gulf
marshes in the states of Louisiana and Texas. This overpopulation
resulted in the Nutria consuming most of the available vegetation
in the marshes of Texas and Louisiana, causing great damage to
these marshes.  This caused the Nutria to move inland to feed on
the expanse of sugar and rice fields in the two states. The only
hope to protect the crops of these states is that a viable market
for Nutria products can be found, so that trappers will have the
incentive to maintain their trapping operations, which will reduce
the population, therefore reducing the damage to the crops. 

2.   Description

     Since 1943, Nutria have inhabited the Gulf marshes of the
Southern US in the states of Louisiana and Texas. These invading
mammals were brought to the US from the southern regions of
Argentina, with the intention that their fur would be harvested and
sold for profit, while their meat could be consumed in such tasty
dishes as Nutria chili or fricassee. However, when many Nutria
ranchers realized that the market for Nutria was not profitable,
they proceeded to release the rodent into the wild, where it has
flourished, by consuming the vast vegetation of the Louisiana
Marshes, as well as consuming the Texas rice and sugar fields.

     Background

     The Nutria is an aquatic, marsh dwelling animal, which was
introduced into the US from South America. The first Nutria which
were imported into the US for fur farming, occurred in 1899 (1) and
this introduction occurred in Elizabeth Lake, California, which is
located in Southern California. It was at this time when the Nutria
were realized to be extremely rapid as well as successful breeders,
and this lead to an increase in Nutria fur farms establishing
themselves in such states as Washington, Oregon, Michigan, New
Mexico, Utah, Ohio, and Louisiana. It was also at this time, when
Tabasco tycoon and millionaire, E.A. McIllhenny, imported his own
Nutria for a fur farm which he established on Avery Island in
Louisiana.(2)

       By WWII, the market for Nutria pelts had crashed, and many
farmers had curiously reported that their Nutria had "escaped."
However, the rumor was that McIllhenny and the other Louisiana
farmers had released their stock of approximately 150 Nutrias into
the Louisiana Bayou. After this "escape", the Nutria, which
migrated to the more northern regions of Louisiana, had died off
due to the cold weather conditions, however, the southern Nutria,
which remained in the bayou, spread immensely, especially in the
gulf region of Louisiana and Texas. At this time, many of the human
inhabitants held the belief that the Nutria were not pests, due to
its massive effort of eating the overgrown weeds in the marshes.
However, the nutria were soon seen as the menace for which it had
become, when its feeding habits had begun to involve the sugar and
rice fields of Louisiana and Texas.  

     Today

     Due to accidents and purposeful releases of the Nutria, they
have fully established themselves throughout the southern US, as
well as having taken up residence in 40 states throughout the
Union.(3) This hardy animal continues to adapt to conditions once
thought to be uninhabitable for the species, while conversely,
worldwide disinterest in the Nutria pelt has lead to a decrease in
trapping.     
     However, Nutria meat continues to be sold to mink ranchers as
a source of food, which allows for some trapping  to continue in
Louisiana. But, the main way in which the population of Nutria is
controlled today, is through a form of poison, which is known as
zinc phosphate, which can wipe out colonies of the Nutria, without
causing much harm to other species in the vicinity. 

     What are Nutria?

     Nutria are large semi-aquatic rodents, which have a round
tail, similar to a rat, and webbed feet, similar to an otter, and
the closest relative to the Nutria in the wild is the porcupine.
The name "Nutria," which is also the name of its pelt, originates
from the Spanish word "otter," and other US names for this animal
are the Coypu, Coypus, and to scientists, it is known as Myocastor
Coypus. 

     There are three types of Nutria found in South America, and
they include the Chilean, Patagonian, and Argentinian Nutria, which
were bread together in the 1930's by Mr. McIllhenny, to attempt to
increase their overall fur quality before they were brought into
the US. 

     Currently, fourteen states, principally Louisiana and Texas,
are involved in Nutria trapping for fur and meat, which amounts to
a several million dollar a year industry.(4) This Nutria fur has a
distinct coarseness, caused by stiff guard hairs which must be
plucked out when being prepared for the fur market, which once
removed, will leave the fur with a soft, fine underhair which
comprises the pelt. The color of Nutria fur varies from black, to
dark amber, to a light rusty or brownish blond, which is dependent
upon the environment with which the Nutria live, which may range
from marshes, to swamps, to even open fields. Even though this
color may vary a great deal, the pelt is usually dyed once it
reaches the fur industry, and therefore, the color is relative
insignificant.

       Currently, the Louisiana Nutria industry is the largest
producer of Nutria pelts and meat in the US, which at this time is
providing over one million pelts per year.(5) This has been a
considerable growth from the 8,500 pelts taken from Louisiana
trappers in 1945.(6) This growth was also experienced in the decade
of the 1950's, whereby pelt trapping had increased to 40,000, while
in 1961 the pelt total reached one million, where this number has
steadily remained constant up to and through the 1990's.(see table
1)(7) 

     TABLE 1       Increase in Pelts Taken
     
     Year            Number of Pelts
     1945              8,500
     1950             40,000
     1961           1,000,000
                Source:About Nutria and Their Control

     What Nutria are Like
     
     The average length of the Nutria, from snout to tail reaches
24 inches in length when it is fully grown, and this growth usually
peaks at  one and a half years of age. When this full growth is
reached, the adult male Nutria will usually reach 20 pounds, and
the female may reach 18 pounds.(8) 

     The characteristics and habits of the Nutria are also quite
curious, in that when frightened, they can move quite quickly,
usually taking refuge in the water, where their webbed feet allow
them to swim quite effectively. If startled, the wild Nutria can
stay submerged for up to 10 minutes. However, when frightened, it
is likely that the Nutria did not see or smell what exactly
frightened it, due to its poor eyesight and sense of smell, but it
does possess good hearing which enables it to sense any present
danger. This excellent hearing has evolved, due in large part, to
the Nutria's feeding habits, in which it feeds primarily at night 
when it would be difficult to see. Therefore, the Nutria's
nocturnal nature has lead to this increased development of hearing.
At night, the Nutria feed almost exclusively on weeds in marshes,
swamps, and bayous, and they are able to eat approximately 2.5 to
3.5 pounds of vegetation per day, however, if extreme conditions
persist, the Nutria can survive up to 29 days without food.(9) 

     The Louisiana Nutria are mostly found living in platforms
within the bayou, in which they have accumulated vegetation which
they have been feeding on, inside their burrows, in which they
actually live upon. However, Nutria are known to invade and take
over Muskrat houses as well as beaver lodges, therefore, driving 
these animals from their homes and forcing them to take refuge
elsewhere. It is then in these burrows, as well as evacuated 
muskrat houses, where Nutria choose to reproduce, and this
reproduction may occur throughout the year. 

     The normal age in which the Nutria reach sexual maturity is
very young, and occurs at approximately four to six months, which
is dependent upon food supply and availability. Breeding may occur
between littermates, and may even occur between the mother and
father with their own offspring, which accounts for their rapid
birth rates. When a litter has been born, it can number anywhere
from one, to nine offspring, however the rate of miscarriage of the
Nutria is 45%, and only 65% of Nutria embryos survive to be
born.(10) Because of the extremely high mortality rates, the nutria
must be able to reproduce very quickly. 
     
     Enemies of Nutria

     The number one enemy of the Nutria is the weather, which comes
in the forms of hurricanes, tornadoes, and freezes, which cause
great losses of Nutria in the US. These uncontrollable weather
situations cause great damage to the Nutria's environment, and not
only damages their burrows where they live, but also damages their
various food supplies.The second leading enemy of Nutria is man,
with his trapping and poisoning, followed by alligators, turtles,
and large snakes.     

     If the Nutria go unchecked by man, and the weather cooperates
without the occurrence of a hurricane, the high birth rate of the
Nutria may lead to an overpopulation problem, which may greatly
affect the sugarcane and rice farmers of Louisiana and Texas, in
which 224,000 acres of sugarcane, 186,000 acres of rice in
Louisiana, and 425,000 acres of rice in Texas have been damaged in
recent years.(11) This damage has been due to the overpopulation
problem of the Nutria, and the fact that the Nutria must find
additional food once it eats all the available vegetation in the
marshes. 

     The other problem caused by Nutria overpopulation in the
Louisiana bayou, involves Nutria burrows, in that the Nutria build
their burrows into the levees of the marshes. When these burrows
are built, they may cause leaks in the levees, and eventually and 
unpredictably allow the marshes to drain into the sea.            
   
     These overpopulation problems,  which are attributed to the
Nutria, can be traced to a decline in the fur market for Nutria
pelts over the past thirty years. This declining interest is
causing the Nutria trappers to stop the aggressive trapping of
Nutrias, and thus, the population has not been kept in check in
many years. However, the Nutria population must be controlled, and
ideally, this control would involve their use for fur and meat, but
this has not occurred, due to the current factors of poor pelt
prices, the seasonal distribution of Nutria trapping, and the fact
that there simply is not enough money to make the trapping
profitable. 

     When, Where, and How to control Nutria

     Nutria must be controlled in such a manner so that they will
not incur damage upon rice and sugar fields in the Louisiana and
Texas regions, even if their pelts have lost their profitability.
This control may come in the form of trapping, shooting, and/or
poisoning. In the past, trapping was the most popular means of
controlling Nutria, however, now that pelt prices have declined,
many farmers have resorted to shooting and poisoning the Nutria as
a quick fix. The poison of choice is zinc phosphide, which is
commercially utilized to control pesky rodents. Usually, the poison
is baited onto carrots, in areas which contain high density
populations of Nutria in marshy conditions. Once the majority of
Nutria have died, the carcasses are then destroyed to avoid
inadvertent poisonings to vultures or other scavengers who might
feed on the Nutria carcasses.  
     
     Nutria Controversy

     The controversy over Nutria, as they exist in the US today,
follows two main themes. The first theme concerns the Nutria as a
protected fur bearer, while at the same time, it is also hunted as
a pest, due to the damage with which it inflicts upon rice and
sugar farms. Unfortunately for the Nutria, it does not concentrate
on eating the plants for which man introduced it into the
environment to control. Not only has this failure of plant control
been realized, but also the Nutria fur, which was once thought of
as high quality, proved to be disappointing on the world fur
market. 
 
     Other Inventive Uses for Nutria

     Since the middle 1960's, to early 1970's, at the height of the
Nutria market, when over one million pelts were collected, at an
average price of $1.50 per pelt, and their total value of $1.9
million had been accumulated, other inventive methods of use have
arisen.(12) Not only was the fur utilized by sending it to Europe 
for coats, as well as meat for mink food, but the US Department of
Agriculture also utilized Nutria for growing screwworms for
laboratory experiments which could later be introduced into farm
animals for the purpose of running tests on the animals to find
what effects the parasites had, as well as the teeth were used by
native Louisianans to make jewelry, and it was thought to be a form
of "white Ivory." However, in the 1980's and early 1990's, the
pelts had been registered at all time lows, and therefore other
methods of use for Nutria needed to be found.       The answer to
the problem of Nutria overpopulation might lie in Chef Paul
Prudhomme's New Orleans based kitchen, where he has come up with
some rather intriguing Nutria dishes. These fine delights include
the likes of cubed and deep fried Nutria,apple smoked Nutria,
Nutria fricassee, and Nutria tacos. Due to the Nutria's vegetarian
lifestyle, it is a very lean animal, and is said to taste like
rabbit. Not only is Nutria being eaten in New Orleans, but it is
also found on menus in Europe, as well as the orient, and South
America. 

     Within the past decade, Louisiana has brought in a Nutria
market consultant in a last ditch effort to try and raise the price
of Nutria pelts, and to attempt to cause an increase in Nutria
products. While this attempt may or may not work, many inquiries
are being undertaken by many countries in Asia and Africa
concerning Nutria and its various products. While many of these
countries look toward Louisiana for Nutria, other areas of the
world are also involved in Nutria harvesting.     

     The most successful Nutria farms are currently found in Poland
and Argentina, however Louisiana is gaining ground on these two
regions in terms of overall pelt production, and all three regions
are currently involved in competition over the Asian and African
markets. 

     In the 1990's, approximately one million Nutria have been
harvested annually, which amounts to about 10% of the total
Louisiana population of the animal.(13) Between 1943 to 1944, 436
pelts were harvested, and from 1955 to 1956 160,000 pelt were
harvested, while in 1962 to 1963 three million pelts were
harvested, and this number has remained fairly constant up until
1995, while the price of pelts has not increased or remained
constant but has dropped.(14) 

     In order for the Nutria population to be held in check, there
must be a deliberate attempt to find new and innovative markets for
Nutria products. If these markets are not found, then the US will
face a serious problem in the way of rice and sugar crop damage in
the gulf coast states. Hopefully, new ideas and markets can be
found, in order to reverse the damage for which E.A. McIllhenny has
inflicted upon his own land of birth.  

3.   Related Cases 

ECFURBAN Case
BABYSEAL Case
BEAR Case
TUNA Case
SHARK Case
EASTANIM Case

Keyword Clusters

     (1):Trade Product             = FUR
     (2):Bio-Geography             = TEMPERATE
     (3):Environmental Problem     = Habitat Loss 

4.   Draft Author: Jason R. Miller (May, 1996)

B.   LEGAL Cluster
                                 
5.   Discourse and Status: DISagreement and INPROGress

     There have been nongovernmental agreements taken up to attempt
to boost the overall worth of the Nutria pelt and products.

6.   Forum and Scope: USA and UNILateral


7.   Decision Breadth: 1[USA]


8.   Legal Standing: Sublaw
 

9.   Geographic Locations
 
     A. Geographic Domain: North America [NAMER] 
     B. Geographic Site  : Eastern North America [ENAMERI]
     C. Geographic Impact: USA

10.  Sub-National Factors: NO       

11.  Type of Habitat: TEMPERATE

D.   TRADE Clusters

12.  Type of Measure: Regulatory Standard

13.  Direct vs. Indirect Impacts: INDIRect 
     
     While overall worldwide demand for Nutria products has
decreased, Nutria populations have exploded, and damage to southern
rice and sugarcane have ensued. 

14.  Relation of Measure to Environmental Impact

     A. Directly Related   :YES SUGAR and RICE 
     B. Indirectly Related :NO 
     C. Not Related        :NO
     D  Process Related    :Yes HABITAT LOSS

15.  Trade Product Identification : NUTRIA skins and products

16.  Economic Data: Industry Output ($): 3.6 million/year 

     The price of Nutria pelts have fluctuated since the first
records have been kept concerning their economic development, which
began in 1944/45(see table 1). During that year, 436 pelt were
trapped, at $.50 per pelt for a total value of $218. In 1953/54,
160,654 pelt were trapped, at $2.00 per pelt, for a total of
$321,308.  In 1963/64 1,304,267 pelts were trapped at a price of
$1.50/pelt, for a total of $1,956,400.50. During the 1980,s and
early 1990's, the price of Nutria pelts had dropped back down by a
dollar, which rendered Nutria trapping a business with very little
to no profitability. Thus, what has ensued is an overpopulation of
Nutria, to the point where their natural vegetation has been
depleted, forcing the Nutria to invade the sugarcane and rice
fields of southern Louisiana and Texas, therefore causing great
damage. 

     TABLE 1      Price Fluctuation in Nutria Pelts

     Year      Pelts Tapped   Price/Pelt    Total

1944/1945               436     $.50           $218
1953/1954           160,654    $2.00       $321,308
1963/1964         1,304,267    $1.50     $1,956,401              

                 Source:AboutNutria and their Control 
                                           
17.  Impact of Measures on Trade Competitiveness: BAN

     Dollar loss by the trappers causes their buying power to be
reduced. This also contributes to the negative effects on the local
businesses in Louisiana communities. Nutria pelts have decreased
due in part to negative public opinion toward fur products in
general. 

18.  Industry Sector: Textiles/Apparel [TEXTAPP]

19.  Exporters and Importers: USA AND MANY 

     Leading U.S. Exporter (US$): Louisiana ($3.6 million)

V. Environmental Clusters

20.  Environmental Problem Type: Habitat Loss

21.  Name, Type, and Diversity of Species

     Name          : Nutria 
     Type          : Animal/Vertebrate/Mammal/Vegetarian          
     Diversity     : 18 Mammals per 1 square mile
     IUCN Status   : NA

22.  Impact and Effect: LOW and PRODuct

     Due to the current apathy associated with the Nutria market,
the population has increased. This in turn, has caused great
pressure on the sugar and rice farmers of Texas and Louisiana, and
these farmers say that the Nutria populations must be controlled. 

23.  Urgency of Problem: LOW

24.  Substitutes: NO

25.  Culture:YES

     Also, the overpopulation has caused the animal to burrow holes
into levees for their homes. This eventually causes the marsh to
leak, and in time it will dry up, and the marsh's its water will be
lost to the sea, which will kill the vast amounts of freshwater
fish and plants in the marsh. 

26.  Human Rights: NO

27.  Trans-Boundary Issues: YES

28. Relevant Literature

Cohn, Jeffrey P., "Call of the North." Americas Sept./Oct.        
1988:3843.      

Evans, James.  About Nutria and Their Control. US Department of the
Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. Denver: US    
Government Printing Office, Washington D.C., 1970. 

Jackson, Donald Dale, "Orangetooth is Here to Stay." Audobon July
1990: 88-94.           

Trillin, Calvin. "The Nutria Problem." Atlantic Monthly Feb. 1995:
30-42.

Willner, Gale R., Joseph A. Chapman, and Duane Pasley.     
"Reproduction, Psychological Responses, Food Habits, and   
Abundance of Nutria on Maryland Marshes." Wildlife Monographs     
April 1979: 6-41.                                 


                            References

1.   Gale R. Willner, Joseph A. Chapman, and Duane Pursley,
Reproduction, Physiological Responses, Food Habits, and Abundance
of Nutria on Maryland Marshes, (Louisville, University of
Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, 1979) , p. 7.

2.   James Evans, About Nutria and their Control, (Denver, U.S.
Department of the Interior Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,
1970) , p.14.

3.   Donald Dale Jackson, "Orangetooth is Here to Stay," Audobon,
July 1990, p.90. 

4.   Jeffrey P. Cohn, "Call of the North," Americas, Sept./Oct.
1988, p.41. 

5.   James Evans, About Nutria and their Control, (Denver, U.S.
Department of the Interior Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,
1970) , p.22.

6    James Evans, About Nutria and their Control, (Denver, U.S.
Department of the Interior Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,
1970) , p.31. 

7.   James Evans, About Nutria and their Control, (Denver, U.S.
Department of the Interior Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,
1970) , p.44.

8.   Calvin Trillin, "The Nutria Problem," Atlantic Monthly, Feb.
1995, p.32.

9.   Calvin Trillin, "The Nutria Problem," Atlantic Monthly, Feb.
1995, p.30. 

10.  James Evans, About Nutria and their Control, (Denver, U.S.
Department of the Interior Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,
1970) , p.62. 

11.  Calvin Trillin, "The Nutria Problem," Atlantic Monthly, Feb.
1995, p.32.

12.  James Evans, About Nutria and their Control, (Denver, U.S.
Department of the Interior Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,
1970) , p.67.

13.      Jeffrey P.Cohn, "Call of the North," Americas, Sept/Oct.
1988, p. 43. 

14.  James Evans, About Nutria and their Control, (Denver, U.S.
Department of the Interior Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,
1970) , p.68.