In many reseach studies about invasive species, the authors use militaristic language to describe the problems that alien species have caused. However, Brendon Larson says that this approach is inadequate and inaccurate. In 2005, he argued his point by saying that militaristic statements lead to inaccurate perception of invasive species, contribute to misunderstanding and loss of credibility, and patterns of thought that are not productive for conservation. He stated that to be a war, there has to be two sides, one good and one evil(Larson, 2005). However, one side cannot be determined evil or good becasue many invasions were intentional and were facilitated by humans. Larson also suggested that the militaristic language is not representing the conservation efforts well and doen’t inform the public adequately about the solutions (Larson, 2005).
In my literature review, “The possible affects of bloody red shrimp in the Great Lakes”, I use militaristic language to describe how the problems of the invasion and how important it is to control the shrimp. I believe that this a very effective way to inform people of the problems and to get them to take action. This tactic is useful because it is designed to capture the public attention. Once the attention is on the issue of invasive species, planning can take place on how this problem can be controlled.