evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Nutria Eradication Project (Nakdong River Basin, South Korea)

South Korea · Changwon · See the South Korea profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 47% 47/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

South Korea's Ministry of Environment ran a nationwide Nutria Eradication Project (2014-2022) using GPS-tracked field teams and capture incentives; recorded nutria habitat tracks fell from 1,510 (19 districts, 2014) to 176 (14 districts, 2018), a 72% national decline by 2022.

3,349
2013 pilot captures (2013)
27,487
Total nutria captured (2014-2018)
7,864
Annual captures, 2014 (2014)
1,930
Annual captures, 2018 (2018)
1,510 (across 19 districts)
Recorded habitat tracks, 2014 (2014)
176 (across 14 districts)
Recorded habitat tracks, 2018 (2018)
72%
National decline in nutria numbers (2014-2022)
~USD 9.5 million
Initial programme funding
USD 4 million
Additional 2017 funding (2017)
~95
Field specialists deployed
18
Coordinating organisations

Details

Promoter
Ministry of Environment, Republic of Korea / National Institute of Ecology
Period
2014-2022 (pilot 2013)
Keywords
invasive species eradication, wetland management, wildlife control, freshwater ecosystem restoration

Context

Nutria (Myocastor coypus), a South American rodent introduced to Korea in the 1980s for fur and meat farming, escaped after the industry collapsed and established invasive wetland populations that damage riverbank embankments, agricultural crops and native wetland vegetation, especially along the Nakdong River basin in South Gyeongsang Province.

Activities

Following a 2013 pilot that captured 3,349 individuals, Korea's Ministry of Environment launched the national 'Nutria Eradication Project' in 2014, coordinating 18 organisations (national and local government agencies, research institutes) with roughly 95 field specialists conducting GPS-mapped surveys in spring, late autumn and winter across 42+ weeks per year. Techniques included GIS-based capture-area targeting, cage trapping along riverbank movement corridors, and a public capture-incentive scheme. Initial funding was around USD 9.5 million, with a further USD 4 million allocated in 2017 for improved detection and population-modelling technology.

Results

Between 2014 and 2018 the programme captured 27,487 nutria (annual totals falling from 7,864 in 2014 to 1,930 in 2018), and recorded habitat tracks fell from 1,510 across 19 administrative districts (2014) to 176 across 14 districts (2018) — roughly a 54% drop between 2016 and 2017 alone. Ministry of Environment monitoring reported a 72% decline in nutria numbers in southern Korea between 2014 and 2022.

Conclusions

Independent academic assessment (Jo et al., published in Sustainability) cautions that nutria remain established in refuge wetlands and complete eradication has not been achieved; ongoing monitoring and control funding continue to be required, and some capture methods have drawn animal-welfare criticism from wildlife advocates.

Implementation

Indicative cost
High (€500k–€5M) — Initial funding ~USD 9.5 million plus a further USD 4 million allocated in 2017 for improved detection and modelling technology.
Time to results
Long (> 3 years) — 2013 pilot; national programme 2014-2022 (peer-reviewed data covers 2014-2018 in detail, with a further reported decline figure to 2022).
Staffing & skills
~95 field specialists, 18 coordinating national/local government agencies and research institutes

Conditions for success

  • GPS-mapped, GIS-targeted survey and capture methodology
  • Multi-agency coordination (18 organisations)
  • Public capture-incentive scheme
  • Sustained multi-year funding (~USD 13.5 million tracked)

Common failure modes

  • Independent academic assessment (Jo et al.) finds nutria remain established in refuge wetlands — complete eradication not achieved
  • Some capture methods have drawn animal-welfare criticism from wildlife advocates

Where it fits

Governance type
national government-led multi-agency eradication programme
Scale
nationwide, concentrated in the Nakdong River basin
Income level
high-income (South Korea)

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Similar practices you may find useful