434 K Srinivasan and R Kasturirangan Prevalence The UK Canal & River Trust’s focus on protecting ‘native’ wildlife from ‘a flood of invasive creatures’ (WaterPatrol 2015, p 2) echoes global anxieties about invasive alien species While the discourse about the impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) is often framed around their impacts on ‘native’ species, the broader concern is the impact on biodiversity The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) identifies IAS as one of the ‘main direct drivers of biodiversity loss at the global level’ and as a cross-cutting issue to be addressed by all of its thematic programmes (Convention on Biological Species 2015c) Article 8(h) of the CBD requires that ‘Each Contracting Party shall, as far as possible and as appropriate: (h) Prevent the introduction of, control or eradicate those alien species which threaten ecosystems, habitats or species’(Convention on Biological Species 1993b) The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), one of the world’s largest and best known conservation groups, similarly prioritises the control of IAS arguing that they ‘represent the second most significant cause of species extinction worldwide after habitat destruction’ (IUCN 2015) In general, conservation action across the world and at various levels is devoting increasing attention to the control of animals and plants that are considered ‘invasive alien’ Invasive alien organisms are also targeted by the private sector when financial profits are negatively impacted (for instance, the logging industry can be impacted by grey squirrels) This international concern translates into extensive research and action into management of IAS across the world The dispersed (across the public and private sectors) character of programmes to manage IAS and the conflation of the costs of management and impact make it difficult to determine accurately the numbers of organisms affected by these programmes However, partial estimates of the expenditure and projected costs of IAS management offer a sense of the prevalence of the problem Annual government spending in the UK on just quarantine and surveillance of IAS is estimated to be GBP £17.766 million (Williams et al 2010) It is estimated that the annual costs of controlling IAS in just 12 countries to meet the Convention on Biological Diversity’s Aichi 2020 targets will be USD $15,083.9 million (Turpie and Jurk 2012, p 14) Globally, it is estimated that USD $73,421 million is required annually for the prevention and control of IAS to meet CBD targets (Turpie and Jurk 2012, p 21) This chapter examines the violence and abuse towards animals implicated in the control of IAS In particular, we focus on the legitimisation and support of