Raccoon: Management of Invasive Alien Species

Seemingly untouched environments often harbour wild animals and plants that originate from outside the geographic area and can disrupt ecosystems and harm biodiversity by displacing native species.

Through human activities, these animal and plant species can be introduced into new areas — either intentionally or accidentally — through various pathways, including the exotic pet trade.

In EU legislation, these species are referred to as invasive alien species (IAS), and member states are required to eradicate newly emerging populations or to control populations that have already become fully established in an area. This applies to the misunderstood raccoon (Procyon lotor), a beautiful ring-tailed, masked mammal native to North America. The Eurogroup for Animals questions and answers explain how this affects the raccoon.

Is the raccoon included on the IAS Union List?

Yes, raccoons are on the European Union List of Invasive Alien Species (Union List). All species on this list are therefore subject to the provisions of the IAS Regulation, and the raccoon has a large, well-established population in some parts of Europe, particularly in Germany.

Why is the raccoon on the list?

As a non-native species, raccoons were introduced when they escaped from households where they were kept as pets or from fur farms. Starting from Germany and France, the population grew and is now present in 16 member states.

The intelligence and opportunistic nature of raccoons, along with their omnivorous diet — which includes eggs, chicks, and adult birds — mean that they can have serious impacts on biodiversity. They are also known to damage orchards, vineyards, and chicken farms, and they are carriers of significant diseases and parasites such as rabies, roundworms, and toxoplasmosis.

How were raccoons added to the list?

Inclusion on the list is a lengthy and complex process that involves detailed risk assessments by scientific review panels and requires a wide range of evidence. However, the reasons for including raccoons on the Union list have historically been opaque, and it has not been clear how the evidence was used.

Some studies demonstrating a negligible ecological impact of the raccoon were never taken into account, and several studies used to justify inclusion on the list do not appear to be entirely relevant. Greater transparency regarding this process is urgently needed.

What does this mean for the raccoon?

This can mean that the raccoon is often referred to as a «pest» or «vermin», and inclusion on the list can distract the public from the fact that these animals are sentient and intelligent beings capable of experiencing joy and pain, and that they have the capacity to suffer greatly. This leads to the creation of «second-class species«.

Hunters therefore often employ indiscriminate techniques and view the list as a pretext to hunt as many of these animals as possible. In Germany, for example, over 200’000 raccoons were killed between 2020 and 2021, and financial bounties are even paid in some cases for killing them.

Sick or injured raccoons that are captured may not be released, meaning they must spend the rest of their lives in captivity, causing prolonged suffering and placing a burden on rescue centers.

Does the inclusion of the raccoon on the list have any benefits?

Inclusion on the Union List means that raccoons may no longer be deliberately introduced, kept, transported, bred, or released. In the past, raccoons were a popular pet both inside and outside the EU, which has a significant long-term impact on the animals' welfare.

While many raccoons suffer greatly at the hands of hunters in the name of population management, the text of the IAS Regulation clearly states that non-lethal methods can be used to manage these species. We believe this should not merely be stated, but actively promoted through official guidelines from the European Commission. Furthermore, the Regulation stipulates that member states should avoid unnecessary suffering when managing invasive species, yet humane management methods are still lacking.

Should the raccoon be removed from the list?

It appears that the available evidence does not meet the high threshold required by the Commission for removing the raccoon from the list, although additional research and information could help clarify the situation.

The benefits of removing the raccoon from the list do not outweigh the negative consequences for this remarkable creature, as they would likely continue to be hunted under member states' hunting laws.

Removal from the list could lead to an increase in the currently prohibited trade in raccoons, which would mean long-term suffering for a large number of them.

What should be done?

The IAS Regulation leaves room for humane management, and we urge the Commission to encourage member states to fund and research humane management measures, such as small-scale trap-neuter-and-release strategies and the promising field of fertility control.

In addition, important awareness campaigns must be carried out to help the public and IAS managers understand the sentience of wildlife.