Discover the truth about so-called 'trash animals' and why our perceptions of raccoons, coyotes, pigeons and other misunderstood creatures are completely wrong.
Picture this: you wake to a crash outside your home. You peer through the curtains to find garbage scattered everywhere and a masked bandit rummaging through the mess—a raccoon, its eyes gleaming in the darkness. Your first reaction might be annoyance, even anger. But what if this animal isn't just a pest, but an astonishingly intelligent creature perfectly adapted to the world we've created?
This scenario plays out daily in cities and towns across the world, not just with raccoons but with countless other species we've labeled as "trash animals." But what exactly is a trash animal? The term has nothing to do with the animals themselves and everything to do with human perception. As editors Kelsi Nagy and Phillip David Johnson II explain in their book Trash Animals: How We Live with Nature's Filthy, Feral, Invasive, and Unwanted Species, these are creatures deemed "worthless, useless, and disposable" based solely on their relationship to humans 5 .
The first known use of "trash animal" in print dates back to 1749, describing certain types of herring as "trash" compared to more valuable varieties 6 .
What transforms an animal from a neutral being to a reviled pest? The reasons are more about human psychology and behavior than anything inherent to the animals themselves.
Many so-called trash animals thrive on human laziness. Cockroaches and rats clean up after us, while others like Canada geese and coyotes invade environments we've created 2 .
Many beliefs about these animals are based on cultural stories rather than reality. David Johnson grew up hearing prairie dog holes were dangerous to livestock, but evidence was scarce 6 .
Our treatment of animals is filled with contradictions. The Canada goose was once the subject of conservation campaigns, now derisively called "sky carp" 6 .
| Animal | Historical Status | Current Status | Reason for Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Canada Goose | Nearly extinct, subject of conservation campaign 6 | Overabundant "trash" animal 6 | Successful conservation created non-migratory populations |
| Carp | Deliberately introduced as food source 6 | Undesirable "trash" fish 6 | Change in culinary preferences, perception as competitor |
| Prairie Dog | Natural component of ecosystem | Agricultural pest 2 6 | Mythologized threat to livestock, habitat conversion |
| Starling | Intentionally introduced for cultural reasons 2 7 | Invasive nuisance 2 7 | Overpopulation, competition with native birds |
One of the most revealing studies challenging our assumptions about trash animals comes from research on raccoons conducted by scientists at the University of Wyoming 3 .
Researchers trapped 204 raccoons in Laramie, Wyoming, recording each animal's approximate age, gender, and temperament 3 .
Each raccoon was fitted with a tracking tag and released back into the city, allowing scientists to monitor their movements 3 .
Researchers placed specially designed wooden boxes with illuminated buttons that dispensed food rewards when pressed 3 .
Raccoons proved extremely intelligent and adaptable, with 19 of the 40 tagged raccoons learning to push the buttons, and 17 mastering the reversal test 3 .
Contrary to expectations, docile raccoons performed better at problem-solving tasks than their aggressive counterparts 3 .
Social learning occurred despite experimental constraints, with multiple raccoons trying to enter boxes simultaneously 3 .
| Temperament Type | Behavior Characteristics | Performance on Puzzle Tasks |
|---|---|---|
| Docile | Calm, non-aggressive | Better performance on button-pushing tasks |
| Aggressive | Growling, hissing, swiping | Poorer performance on learning tasks |
The implications are significant: if wildlife officials typically remove the most "aggressive" raccoons, they might inadvertently be preserving the very animals best equipped to outsmart our prevention methods 3 .
Our categorization of certain species as "trash" has real-world consequences for ecosystems and the animals themselves.
When we remove or poison animals we consider pests, we often create cascading effects throughout ecosystems.
For example, Kelsi Nagy writes about how prairie dogs, despite being despised by many westerners, play a crucial role in water cycles. Their holes allow rainwater to sink into aquifers instead of evaporating on the plains 2 .
Similarly, our attempts to control insects with pesticides have led to pesticide-resistant super-pests and a contaminated environment 2 .
The very qualities we dislike in these animals are actually remarkable adaptations for survival.
As one reviewer of Trash Animals notes, "They shake things up, and keep us connected to the dirty, the fecund, and all the parts of nature that aren't so easily controlled, colonized, and beaten down" 1 .
Jeffrey A. Lockwood, writing in "A Six-Legged Guru," acknowledges this while collecting prairie lubber grasshoppers with students: "Within minutes our hands are covered in feces and vomit" 1 . Yet he recognizes that wrestling with these messy creatures is good for us—it keeps us connected to the untamable parts of nature.
"Negative" Trait: Scavenges human waste
Survival Advantage: Can survive in human-modified environments
"Negative" Trait: Adapts to suburban areas
Survival Advantage: Can thrive despite habitat loss and persecution
"Negative" Trait: Gets into garbage
Survival Advantage: Intelligent problem-solving ability
"Negative" Trait: Eats food scraps
Survival Advantage: Can utilize urban environments efficiently
If the problem of "trash animals" originates in human perception, then the solution must begin with changing our minds. As Nagy and Johnson ask in their introduction to Trash Animals, "If, in fact, our false beliefs about a species are the cause for conflicts between humans and animals, might we find a better way to be neighbors simply by changing our minds and then our behaviors?" 5
After facing a cockroach infestation, contributor Carolyn Kraus develops respect for the nearly indestructible species: "He skitters through the maze of life with no hard feelings... and wreaks devastation without malice. It's only fair to note, as well, that we invaded his pantry long before he invaded ours" 9 .
This echoes the observation of animal ethicist Randy Malamud, who writes in the foreword to Trash Animals that if anyone deserves the label of trash animal, it's humans—the species that has trashed the planet 2 .
The concept of "trash animals" reveals more about human psychology than it does about the animals themselves. These creatures—whether raccoons, coyotes, pigeons, or carp—are simply trying to survive in a world we've profoundly altered. Their remarkable adaptability and intelligence, which we so often disparage, are actually qualities to be admired.
As David Johnson reflects on his childhood experiences shooting coyotes he now recognizes were just protecting their existence, "I feel awfully guilty about it" 6 . This guilt stems from recognizing that the "coyote problem" was largely created by human actions—specifically, the eradication of wolves that allowed coyote populations to expand 6 .
The real value of rethinking "trash animals" lies in developing a more humble, nuanced relationship with the natural world. As Johnson hopes, by learning about an animal's biology and history, "you can start to develop an appreciation for the animal, start to see it in a new way" 6 . This shift in perspective might begin with these so-called pests, but it could ultimately transform how humans see our place in a world we must learn to share.