The common myna is sometimes referred to as “Australia’s most hated bird”. Originally from South and Central Asia, the introduced species from the starling family is abundant, raucous and bold.

Mynas thrive just about everywhere they’ve been introduced, from Taiwan to Mauritius to Florida. In 2000, they made the list of the 100 worst invasive species worldwide compiled by the International Union for Conservation of Nature.

This year, Queensland communities are trying to eradicate these introduced birds. But the same story has been written many times. In 2012, Canberra residents launched their own grassroots efforts to keep myna populations down. In 2004, an ABC article titled “Myna fightback” called for war on the bird.

Mynas – and humans’ efforts to monitor, trap and kill them – make for easy headlines. But there’s a cycle. People notice mynas are in abundance. Community organisations distribute traps. Bounties are offered. Myna numbers appear to decrease. But then people get complacent and the bird bounces back.

Every Australian knows common myna birds are bad, rabbits are worse and feral cats kill native animals unchecked.

But how do we decide what makes an introduced species “good” or “bad” – and will we ever concede that some species are here to stay?

Our new series on invasive species explores these questions.

We don’t know if myna numbers are actually soaring in Queensland, or whether people are simply noticing them more. But my research suggests introduced birds come under more scrutiny at times of anxiety about national identity. Earlier panics over the “immigrant bird” (the red-whiskered bulbul) made it explicit.

It’s........

© The Conversation