| Abstract: | A variety of animals occupy the bad side of the Arluke‐Sanders (1996) socio‐zoological scale, including “invasives.” We contribute to the literature on animals and social problems by examining the societal reaction toward invasive Burmese pythons, focusing on the claims‐making process that culminated in the construction of a moral panic about these snakes. We seek to enhance sociological and public knowledge about social problems involving invasive species—a category of non‐human animals, plants, and organisms that attract significant scientific, political, and public attention. We draw from the work of, among others, Arluke and Sanders (1996), Nagy and Johnson (2013) and Jerolmack (2008) and argue that problematizing some animals, especially invasive species, involves the use of claims about ecological and physical harms. However, these claims do not come from the same sources or arouse similar responses. For strategic purposes, claims‐makers may rely on assertions that an animal is physically threatening, rather than ecologically threatening. They may emphasize the dangerousness or lethality of the animal to create fear and generate momentum toward a desired policy response, typically involving control or eradication of the animal. The goal is to restore the boundary between humans and nature which the animal's presence has disrupted. |
